The Express.
London, England, 1846-09-09 00:00:00

of his professional appei. ntments.] Affer looking-at that
date, he said he beelievidd he was present on the 7th.
Found his name entered as present on that day, both in the
minute-book and in the prteince-book. Had no recollection
of signing any cheques, either on the 7th, on the 13th, or on
the loth. Received from Mr. Pulsford three cheques; one for
1001., one for 201., sad one fur 101., and returned them to
Mr. Pulsford. The letter of witness before read referred to
those three cheques. (The witness was here shown the
cheque for 50000 Believed the name "Thomas Stevenson"
written span it to be in his hand-writing. His 111101. was
also on the two other cheques. Did not resume. MOP
having signed any cheques on Contts & Co., whim IMMO
filled up. Believed that the cheque for 101. was Malik ft
No. 11. Was certain that one of the cheque gyms+
by him was for a small amount. There was alt-
natures to all the cheques before he signed tibm,
Never signed a cheque for five thousand pounds on
Cootts and Co. Cross-examined, by Mr. ClinUon.—Had

not signed a cheque for this company in which the amount
was not given. Capt. Richardson once called at witnem's
house in Grosvenor-street. Believed it was about June.

They hid an interview in the back-room of witness. Did not
recollect the prisoner handing over to him the cheque-book
of the company for signature. Would swear pagitlvely
that he had never signed a cheque in which the
amount was not filled up. Captain Richardson did
not say to witnema on the occasion referred to, " Mr. Whit-
more has signed some cheques in blank, have you any objec-
tion to saga them too ?' Had no recollection of such a
circumstance. Did not sign four, or any ; nor sign his name
under or over that of Mr. Whitmore. Had never signed a
cheqrie in that manner in his life. Had frequently refused
to sign cheques when presented by the seceetary of
the company unless they were signed by others.—Mr.
Clarkson then addressed the court. He said he ad-
mitted that if the evidence which had been adduced
against the prisoner was incapable of contradiction
it was evident that a gene fluid had been committed. The
charge of forgery Mimed upon the question whether the
cheque produced for 5000/. was a cheque which was ever
drawn for 10/. This was the act of the three persons who
were trustees for a company. The evidence against
the accused turned on his own declaration, and all
his conduct during the investigation was consistent
with the supposition that he desired to delude those who
were making the inquiries. The in'erence was that the
cheques were not identical, and that the cheque for 5000!.,
which had been produced, was tilled up ia blank. If his
lordship's mind were satisfied that the eneques wire identical
it would then be necessary that the prissier should be be nod
over to appear to answer the charge of forgery ; but if such
were not the case, though a gross fraud might have
been committed, there was nothing to support a charge of
forgery, and in that ease he contended that all which was
necessary under the circumstances was that buil should be
taken for the prisoner's appearance to answer the
charge of fraud. Mr. Bush said the prisoner had
no right to complain of his position as a person charged
with forgery ; inasmuch as he had himself declared
that a forgery must have been committed. On the
principle that a prisoner's declarations might be used against
himself, it was quite proper to use the declarations of Captain
Richardson in support of the present charge. The whole of
that kind of evidence ought to be allowed to have its
full weight. lie submitted that it was absolutely
necessary that the prisoner should be committed for
trial, though he should ask for another week's remand,
in order to obtain additional evidence from Liverpool
and from Ireland. Evidence was then adduced as to
the exertions which have been made within the
test few days to secure the attendance of Mr.
Whitmore. It was stated that there is good reason
to believe that Mr. Whitmore is abroad. —Mr.
Bush said he did not think Mr. Whitmore 's evidence neces-
sary ; there was, he thought, already sufficient to proceed to
trial. The Lord Mayor was of opinion that the pri-
soner should be committed for trial at the approaching
sessions. Mr. Clarkson said he must object to the prisoner
being committed until Mr. Whitmore had been examined.
He had been greatly surprised that morning at the evidence
given by Mr. Stephenson. Mr. Bush did not wish to cast
any imputation on Mr. Whitmore, but be mug say that
if the reports that had appeared in the newspapers would
not produce him, any powers which might be possessed by
that court would fail to have that effect. After considerable
discussion, the prisoner was remanded until Friday the 18th
instant.