The Express.
London, England, 1853-11-21 00:00:00

COURT OF CRIMINAL

PITTING& IN CllO7ll CAM

!MICA ,r 06113107 PLSAA, TIPP LORD CEls• DAMN
NIL JCPTIVI COLAISIDet, MU MITI= I/U.4AM% eta, WSW
PAPAS, AAP IFM. MAIM PLATT.
Teti QOSIX P. 0411.11ITT.—NIC1 FOIST Or LAW Al
ArraCTING COXIIZILCS.
Mr. Sorkin, Bylea and Mr. Medea(' appeared for the
pr , and Mr. Deusley, Mr. Bodkin, and Mr. Huddes-
ton supported the conviction.
The prisoner was tried before Mr. Baron Parke at the
July sessions of the Central Criminal Court fur having on
the 3rd of Match, 1853, demanded payment on the account
of Messrs. Duncan and Co., of the sum of 1,1001. from the
Union Bank, with intent to cheat and defraud the bank.
Two objections were taken at the trial ; firstly, that the
offence was not in contemplation of law committed is Jew
land; and, second) y that the prisoner did not mein tis
obtain the money for his own benefit, and that he did net
intend to defraud the Union Bank. The prisoner was
found seilty, but judgment was respited that the objections
might be argued in this court.
Mr. Serpent Bylas now proceeded to argue the can on
the part of the prisoner. He said the Gets were these:
Messrs. Duncan and Co , bankers, at New York, were in
the habit or issuing circular letters of credit containing the
limes of different banks in Europe. One of these banks
wss the Union Bank of London, and that was the bank
which it was alleged the prisoner meant to defraud.
Messrs. Daneen and Co. gave the prisoner • letter of credit,
draws on ate Union Bank for 21W. The prisoner hairiest/
gone to St. Petcrsburgh, placed the figure 5 before the 210,
and thus he made it appear • letter of eredit for 5,21 W.
This letter of credit he presented to Messrs. Wilson and
CO., of St. Petenburgh, from whom he got 1,2001., and
also a further sum of 2,5001, with which, however, the
court had nothing to do. The prisoner gave Messrs.
Wilson a bill of exchange for 1,2001. on the Union Bank,
and in their favour. They forwarded this to their London
keine, and it was presented for payment at the bank.
Messrs. Duncan and Co., however, having advised the
bank that they had given the prisoner a letter of credit for
2101. only, the bank refined to pay the cheque for 1,2001.
The prisoner having come to England was taken iota cus-
tody, and was indicted, not for obtaining money on
false pretences, but for an attempt to defraud the Union
Bank. No doubt he cheated Messrs. Wilson and Co., and
it was said that he by his subsidiary agents attempted •
fraud on the Union Bank. The objnctions taken by the
prisoner's counsel were that Ude offense was not in con-
tempi ition of law committed in England, and that the pri-
soner did not attempt to obtain the amount of the cheque
from the Union Bank in the sense alleged in the indict-
meat. Three points appeared to arias on these two objec-
tions—first, that the prisoner did not attempt to defraud
the Union Bask at all; secondly, that when the bill was
tendered by Wilson and Co. the prisoner committed no
offence in England ; end, thirdly, that he did not intend to
obtain any chattel, money, or valusble security for himself
within the meaning of the act of parliament. He would,
first of all, address himself to the last point, for he flattered
himself that the discussion of this would render the dis-
cussion of the others immaterial. He would call their lord-
ships' attention to the fact that this was not en indictment foe
an attempt to commit • common law misdemeanour, but it
was a statutable indictment founded on the 7 & 8 Geo. IV.,
c. CJ, and in order to be convicted under that indictment
the prisoner must be in this position, that if the bill had
been paid he would have obtained chattel, money,
or other valuable security. Now, he would contend that
supposing the bill had been paid Wilson and Co. would have
obtained valuable security, er rather money, but that the
prisoner would not. He would only have obtained • debt
in his account, and nothing more. It was • matter of per-
fect indifference to him whether the bank paid the bill or
not, for he bad already obtained the money from Messrs.
Wilson. He would cite the case or the " Queen v. Wavell,"
Moody's Crown Cases. The prisoner in that case was •
miller in the Isle of Wight, and was the tenant allows.
Bassett and Compa bankers at Newport, with whom he
kept an account. Having' overdrawn his account, they re-
fused to make further advances, whereupon he gave them
a bill drawn on • man named Foster, in Mark-lane, for 2001.,
representing that Foster was his debtor, and that he bad
shipped (ilia to him, all of which was untrue. The bank
believing this allowed him to overdraw his account to •
considerable extent. Whec the case came before the judges
Mr. Broderick, for the prisoner, contended that no chattel,
money or valuable thing was obtained by the prisoner by
false pretences alleged or proved. Lord Tenterdeo said he
only received credit in has account, sad the case failed.
The judges held that the conviction was wrong. Now in
this ease Messn. Wilson and Company had been swindled,
and the party whir received the amount of the bill from the
bank, it it had been paid, would have kept it for himself,
sad the prisoner would have got valets in no shape, though
getting vase would not satisfy the statute.
The Lord Chief Baron-1 think, brother B7les, before
you proceed to argue the other points, we will hear the
other side on this point.
Mr. Manley then contended thit the case of the " Queen
T. Warren" was very different from this. He said that
who.:ver presented the cheque to the Union Bank became
the agent WA, prisoner for that purpose. The fraud was
commit ed by the cheque itself. The jury found that he
did intend the drift to be presented and to be paid.
The Lord Chief Baron—l should have been very much
surprised if they hid found anything else ; but they did
not find that he intended that the money should he paid
for his benefit, for he had got all he wanted.
Mr. Deanley—We say it was presented by him through
his agent.
The Lord Chief Baron—lt is not found that Wilson warn
his agent.
Mr. Deanley—lt must be taken that he was his agent.
I confine my case to the facts stated and I say that it
nu.t be takes that this person was the prisoner's agent.
The Lord Chief Justice Jervis—lf instead of his getting
the nosey presently, he had said to Messrs. Wilson send
this cheque to the Union Bank and pay me when it is
discounted, then you might take it that they were his
agents
Mr. Dearsley maintained that it was in point of fact
merely getting the cheque discounted, eau that when it was
pentand it was presented for the prisoner by his agent.
Surely it could not be ssid that, supposing the money had
been paid on this cheque, the innocent person who held it
would have been guilty of having fraudulently obtained
the money.
Mr. Baron Platt—Was not the fraud committed long
before, and was not the real instrument of the fraud the
forgery of the letter of credit ?
Mr. Desnley—The offence of the attempt to ebtain
money comateneed and was completed when the cheque
was prawrated at the Union Bank, and it it it had been paid
it would have been to his advantage, for it would have re-
lieved his from all eespousibility to Messes. Wilson.
The Lord Chief Justice Jenis—The bank dots not pay
es the letter of credit, but on the advice in reference to it.
The Lord Chief Baron said the jury had distinctly found
that the prisoner meant the cheque to have been presented,
but not that it should be paid for his own benefit, and the
court not go one jot beyond that.
Kr. Dearsley—Probably their lordshirs thought the case

"
ak. betteeat Bylee—Serely Sky Lord Chief Buss would
tboyriesoor to be kept is prism say lospv Mr.
WWII,• gbh bed refugees to • mark re by the

Lord Chief Baron oa Saturday !mt. in cirstii Rion with ;tn..
;cant Byles agreeitg in the appiicatim that this case intht
nost.toned.)
The fried Chief 1311)O-.4 antire you, br,thrr Bytes, I
hare an warmer ”inFathy with the prisoner than his own
sGansel bas. (Lsughtsr )
Mr. Manley lb d to contend that this was
precisely the mute as if the prisoner hail himself presented
the cheque at the bank, and that if it had been paid it was,
in contemplation of law, a payment to the prisoner himself.
After a consultation with the judges, the Lord Chief
Baroi. said probably there will not be as agreement among
the judges. so the cue had better be re argued before the
fifteen judges on Saturday neat.

COURT OF B.

r.-SATIIIIDAT.

IN 12 NORTON.-BANILNUTICT IN AN AM MB NAME.-

" RILL lITZALINO."

The bankrupt, who was described in the adjudication as
" William Morton, of Beigrave-street, Pimlico, bill dis-
counter and bill broker," applied for his certificate a short
time ago, when it was shown that his real name was Wil
Liam Morringtoo, and the nun reserved its judgment.
Ihis was the day on which his Honour had appointed
to give judgment; but the bankrupt was not in at-
tendance, he baring, in the interval, been committed
from one of the police courts, on • charge of conspiring
with others to defraud a widow lady of upwards of 2,0001.
His Honour said that an application had been made to
him the preceding day, by Mr. Stevenson, on behalf of cre.
ditora, for • summons to bring up the bankrupt, in order
that he might be examined touching the property said to
have been obtained by his from • widow lady in Glances-
ter-piece ; also as to whether, in addition to the name of
' Morten. in which he had come before that court, and the

name Norriagton, which he admitted to be Ms real
name, be had not 'named the ammo! Grey or Greg, in
that transaction; sad on those grounds the court had
granted a summons.
Mr. Stevenson said he had served the summons per-
sonally.
The

r—Then is be the same individual u is

referred to is tbis polies sus ?
Mr. Stevenson—He is.

WiU be be heretotde, ?

Kr. &imams—l aspen so. I told the governor of the
prison tbst I wished to serve sash a summons upon him ; I
was shown into the room; sad I saved the summons per-
sonally ow Morton. in the governor's preseaor.
The Colemiesioarr—Bat will he bring him up without
• warrant ?

-
Mr. Stevenson—l have not the least idea.
The Commissioner —ls he coming up to day ?
Mr. Linklater (who had appeared for the bankrupt at
the hearing)—l really do not know. With your Honour's
permission, I beg to be considered as declining to take any
further interest in the case. I have no instructions to-day,
but I appeared in expectation of your Honour's judgment
being given. Beyond that I should not have interfered io
the eau. I was not aware until this moment that the
bankrupt was in dune" vile. 1 certainly sh►ll not appear
for him say further.
The Continiasioner—Due it appear what became if the
suety that wu obtained from this lady ?
Mr. Btevemoc —I have no idea.
The Commissioner—Have you no idea that he had part

of that moniy
Mr. Stevenson—No, air.
The Commissioner—There your idea and mine differ,

beesties be menu to ban bee& the chief actor in the
affair.

Mr. Stevenson—l have so i lea one way or the other ;
but inasmuch as this transaction took place before the date
of the bankrupte whatever be received ought to have
appeared in his
The Commissioner—How is It that the thing has only
been found oat so recently ?
Mr. Stevenson—l fancy his public appearance here had
draws attention to it.
The Commissioner—Whether it was before the bank-

ruptcy or after, it would not make any difference ; because
if, at any time before judgment being given, a bankrupt
receives a cam of money and does not account for it, be is

24r. Stevenson—No doubt of it.
The Commissioner—You do not know whether we shall
se* kiss to-day
Mr. Stevenson-1 do not.
The Commissioner—l do not think the governor would
his justified in bringing him up.
Mr. Linklater—Not without your Honour's warrant.
Mr. Winslow (the registrar)—l do not think be would
bring him up without a warrant from tLe Secretary of
State. - - . .

Mr. VlAlater referred to the words in the 112th seetion
(which relates to bankrupts in custody), " under any pro-
cess, execution, attachment, or sentence," and observed that
none of these applied to Morton's case.
The Commissioner—There is one remarkable coincidence
here. I see by the balance-sheet that one gentleman has
proved on • bill of exchange given by William Wright,
Esq., of Northumberland. Now, " William Wright, Esq."
was the gentleman whose hills were given to this lady from
whom the 2.0v01, was obtained. M right was represented
by them as living at Whitby Castle, in Northumberland,
and as being resented of enormous wealth, and on the
faith of this representatioa the lady advanced the money.
It turned out that he bad no castle, though he had lived at
that place some fourteen years ago ; that, in fact, he was so
poor be could hardly raise 20s. " William Clark Wright"
is also the gentleman who proves the trading in this case ;
but there be describes himself as of Great Yarmouth, in the
county of Norfolk.
Mr. Btevenson—They are all exceedingly intimate, no
I doubt. . . . .

The Commissioner then proceeded to give judgment, and
after gong through the details of the case, concluded as
follows Now the question seems to be this—whether, when
the gates of Newgate are closed upon this man, on the ono
band, we are to open the doors of this eoun to him on the
other, and send him forth with a passport into trade as an
honest but unfortunate debtor, giving him all the advan-
tages which the law reserves wholly for that class of per-
sons ? I for one will be no party to any such act. I be-
lieve this is a gross attempt to impale upon the court and
upon hiscrediton. Looking at the conduct of the bankrupt,
even if I could regard him as a trader, which I do not for •
moment, it has been as bad as possible. He has committed
gross fund ; M has cheated • person out of 4001. under
false pretences; he has mad* out false accounts; and he
swears Wetly, when asked, on his last examination, as to
his insolvency. How is it possible to say that • man guilty
of such conduct deserves • certificate of any kind from this
court? And, independently of his conduct as a trader, I
should remain of opinion that a man who has impaled
upon the court by • fraud of this deeeription, and has songht
the benefit of the court under a false description and a
false name, ought not, however leis the freed may be
found oat, to be permitted to avail himself of that benefit.
Under those circumstances the judgment of the court is,
that this certificate be wholly refused.
IN a• DI:NNS AND lIIIKAILDB.—ZITRAORDINAKY
APPLICATION.

The bankrupts in this else were shipowners, who a few
months ago freighted their vessel with merchandise and
sailed for Australia. Meantime a petition in bankruptcy
wa- filed ; and an attempt was made, but without miens.,
to detain the vessel. Through the in lion of friends
the creditors have since been paid in full.
Mr. Leveret's, on behalf of the bankrupt Dunne, applied
to have the time for surrender enlarged for five years. Mr.
Donne wan now engaged in business in Auteuil's, and it
vu probable he would not return to England before the
end of that period.
His Honour thought the period unnecessarily long, and
asked what was the feeling xf the assignees on toe sub-
ject
Mr. Phelp, representing the assignees, said they bad no
opposition to offer to the application. The whole of the
creditors had been paid twenty shillings in t►e pound and
expenses.
After a conversation, . . . .

His Honour made an order enlarging the time (or two
peen with regard to both the bankrupts.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT.-SATURDAT.
IN AI TIII 11v. THIODORI MILLIAMS.-11111 VICARAOI

OP HENDON.

Mr. Cooke, on the part of the provisional alaigoee in the
case of the Rev. Mr. Williams, the Vicar of Hendon, who
was discharged under the act in the early part of the present
year, applied for as order that be might be at liberty to
concur in the sale of the advowson of Hendon in September
last, by public auction, to the Duke of Portland.
Mr. Commissioner Phillips asked, as the sale of the living
took plane in September, when Mr. Williams was discharged
under the act ?
Mr. Cooke said some time previously. There was at pre•
emit a sequestration on the living at the instance of the pro-'
visional assignee for the creditors under the insolvency.
The advowson at the sale to the Duke of Portland realised
8,4001., being 4001. beyond the reserved price. The sale was
at the instance of the trustee, of the marriage settlement of
1 Mr. Williams, and the object of the present application was
that the c-Alcurrence of the provisional assignee might be
obtained to the sale, es there might be an interest accruing
to him. . . .

Mr. Commissioner Phillips wished to know whether the
sale of the advowson was completed?
Mr. Cooke said that, although the sale by auction was in
September, the deeds were not yet completed.
Mr. Commissioner Phillips asked whether the money
realised by the sale, 8,400 f., would be paid into court.
Mr. Cooke said certainly not. The sale was by the
trustees of the settlement, and the money would be invested
according 'o the trust' for Mrs. Williams, for her life, and
the insolvent had • We interest if he survived her, and
then to the children of the marriage.
The Commissioner inquired whether the assent of the
officer of the court was necelsary, and being informed that
it was, made the order, the provisional assignee having no
objection to join in the sale to the Duke et Portland.
Order accordingly.

IN HI RIM THROWN! DILLIAKI.-APPLICATION
AOAINST Till BISHOP OY LONDON.

Mr. Cooke said he had another application to make in
the same cue on the part of the provisionel auignee against
the Bishop of London. The living was sequestrated, and
an amount was repaired from the bishop.
Mr. Commistiouer Phillips remembered that the appli-
eation was made on a former occasion, and he suggested, es
• matter of courtesy, that as application should be made to
the bishop.
Mr. Cooke said an application had been made to the
bishop, who referred the master to his registrar, and the
informatke obtained was an deemed aellaiaat, sad there-
fore he had to apply to the want far a rale co the
A similar oeuni lad boss wood is the Nis a VI