The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1868-07-25 00:00:00

A REMARKABLE WILL CASE.

Two rather remarkable trials for forgery and perjury
were brought to a close at the Cumberland assizes at
Carlisle .. Tuesday. In the first, Jonathan Arm-
strong, thirty-five years of age, a grocer at White-
haven, was charged with forging a will purp.irting to
lee that of his father, on November 8, 1854. The
father of the prisoner wan a respectable yeoman,
living at Camerton, Cumberland, and having some
property there. On September 11, 1854. he died stub
slettlY, leaving behind him a will, dated 1847, by which
he left the whole (if Ids real and ja rs anal estate to his
widow, who within six no nths o' her husband's
decease lowed the will at York Prolate Court, and
enterni into possession of the property. In 1'57 ;
she sold the property in fee to Mr. William Cook, of .
Cameron Hall, for £750. When Cook died his
executors booted a notice of ejectment against Mrs.
Armstrong. Before the action was tried the executors
, went to York to get a copy of the will of John Arm-
strong and found the will bad been revoked, awl that
in April, 1857. a new will had been set up is the Court
of Probate in London. That will was one purporting
to have been made by a John Atinstmng, who died in
1854, and that was the will which was now alleged to be
a forgery. By that instrument the pi operty was left
by John Armstrong to his widow for her lie only, and
afterwards to the prisoner, h r son. It was attetted
by Joseph Steel and Richard Brown, both of whom are
now dead. Evidence was given, however, both by
an export and Iv perams acquainted with the
handwriting of both testator and atteering a it-
nesses, to show that all the three sigtretursa were
1 forgeries ; and further that they bad been executed
by the prisoner. Among other peenliarities, it was
pointed out that the signature of Joseph Steel had
been spelled with a fined "C," RP "Steele," and that
the wont hundred, whenever it occurred, WAR spelled
" hundered," in a waterer in which it was shown
the prisoner wan accustomed to spell it. The
trial lasted from half-past one o'clock on Mon-
day till nearly eleven o'clock at night, when
the jury returned fl verdict of guilty. The
learned Chief Baron sentenced the prisoner to seven
years' penal servitude, and said it WAR quite in vain to
ileny that the prisoner had been guilty of a series of
frAuels and forgeries scr.resily ever parslleled in respect
of a man of his condition of life in civilised society.
" It is only," lie edeserved, "through the liminess and
intelligence of the jury that had to try you that any
protection, by their verdict and by the sentence I tun
about to pass on you, will lee thrown around your
fellow countrymen wherever they may have the mid-
foltune to dwell in the place which yon inhabit"
The other case yaa one arising out of tint same aeries
of frauds and forgeries. In order to support Arm-
strong in one of his frauds the prisoner Richard Belph
had been induced to smear at Carlisle ...sizes in
February last that be .AN present at AR intro view
between Armstrong and Cook at which a dilapidated
deed was handed front one to the other, and Cook
signt d a receipt for a year's rent of some land. In de-
fence it WAS endeavoure I to prove that Mr. Conk had
Iteen present at the interview in question, but the jury
convicted the prisoner, who was sentence/I to imprison-
ment with hard Labour for eighteen calendar ex outlut