Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-12-09 00:00:00

THE PRESTON

POISONING AND FORGERY

CASE.

COMMITTAL OF MR. MONK ON THE CHARGE
OF FORGERY.

CONFESSION OF THE PERSON WHO MADE
?HE WILL,

FROM OUR OWN RZFORTEIt,

PRESTON, TWESDAY EVENING.
The adjourned examination of Mr. Monk, surgeon, of
this town, and one of the aldermen of this borough„ on the
charge of uttering a forged document, purporting to be the
will of the late Sergeant Turner, took place at the Town-
hail, Preston, this day (Tuesday). The court was densely
crowded, and there was an immense assemblage about the
hall during the whole period of the hearing. The excite-
ment in the town in connection with this painful ease had,
if possible, increased since the apprehension of the accused.
This, as might be expected, was much augmented on its
becoming known a short time before the commencement of
the proceedings that the person who had made the will, at
the imt.gation of Mr. Monk, had not only been traced, but
that she had actually confessed to being the instrument of
the forgery.
Mr. Monk arrived at the Town-hall, from the House
of Correction, in the custody of one of the turnkeys, some
time before the commencement of the proceedings. He
appeared very much depressed, evidently feeling most
acutely the sad reverse of his position ; a culprit before
the bench whereon he had so often sat, and tried by
gentlemen with whom he had been so long associated in
the administration of justice.
It had been arranged that no summonses should be
issued for to-day, and the other business of the court was
diepatehed in less than ten minutes, so as to begin as
early as possible with this all-absorbing case.
The magistrates on the Bench were Mr. W. Ains-
worth, in the chair, Mr. J. Humber (Mayor), Mr. W.
Humber, Mr. Birley, Mr. Spencer, Mr. Sidgreaves, Mr.
Peter Catterall, Mr. Paul Catterall, and Mr. Walmsley. ••
As before, Mr. Segar, instructed by Messrs R. and W.
Ashcroft. appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. R A.
Cross, M.P., instructed by Mr. Blackhurst, defended ti e
prisoner. On the case being called,
Mr. Seger announced that his first witness would be
Mrs Pipe. wife of Mr. Pipe, hair-dresser, Fishergate, in
this town. It being known that this was the person who
had admitted to writing the document, her appearance in
the court created quite a- sensation. She appeared to be
suffering terribly, both mentally and bodily, and as she
was being led to the witness-box she swooned, and fell in
court, but was caught by some of the bystanders. She was
taken into the ante-room of the hall, and restoratives
administered to her, but -as she showed no prospect of
immediate recovery, Mr Seger proposed to go on with the
next witness, Mr. John Fisher. During the examination
of Mr. Fisher, Mrs. Pipe was I nught into court again,
and provided with a seat on the magistrates' bench, but
she had speedily to be removed therefrom on account of
continued illness. The following is the evidence given in
the case:—
Mr. Fisher was then examined, -and he stated, in cos-
tinuaion of his previous examination : The prisoner, Mr.
Monk, called on me at the Lancaster Bank on Saturday,
the 26th September, a little after ten in the morning, as
nearly as I can remember. He produced- a paper about
the size of a sheet of letter paper.
Mr. Cross : This is the; question objected to at the last'
hearing, in order that search might be -made for that
paper. The gentleman who instructs me tells me it can't
be found.
Mr. Fisher's examination continued: The paper purported
to be a deposition by Edward Turner of his property in
favour of his " dear friend Thomas Monk." No mention
was made of any other person in the paper, except a
deposition of fiva shillings a week to the housekeeper.
The document itself appeare 1 to be in the handwriting of
Mr. Monk, but I can't swear positively. It purported to
be signed by Edward Turner. I can't say anything
more particularly about it. I believe there was no witness
to it. I think he did not deliver the paper into my hands.
He showed it to me. He said Mr. Turner was dead, and
that he (Mr. Monk) wanted some motley to pay the wages.
He retained the document, and took it away With him.
In answer to his application, I said we could give no money
on a document like that, and that we never paid money
except on the presentation of probate or letters of ad-
ministration. I have got the cheque signed by Mr. Monk,
on which I paid the monefin October. I produce the
cheque.
The Clerk read the draft, as follows :
Preston, October 2, 1857.
Draw from the Lane's er Banking Co npany the sum of
Ga. Bd., to be placed to the account of Edward Turner.

THOyAkEi MONK

The Clerk : In the margin there were the figures
56 15 3.

Mr. Fisher (I,)y Mr. Cross) : That is the same interview
I referred to on my examination on Friday last.
Ann Eden Pipe was then called, and was brought on the
bench from the committee-room. Having been accommo-
dated with a seat, (lvlr. Peter Catterall's) and sworn, she
sta'ed : lam the wife of John Willgrease Pipe, who is a
hairdresser and perfumer, in Fishergate, I have resided
in Preston between five and six years, I know the
prisoner Mr. Thomas Monk Since I have been in Preston
he has been the medical attendant of my family. I re-
member having occasion to call at his surgery one morning
to consult him. It is between two and three months ago,
and between nine and ten o'clock in the morning. I don't
remember the day of the week. I saw Mr. Monk that
morning at his surgery. He appeared to be preparing to
go out. After some hesitation, he asked me if I had time
to copy a paper for him. He produced a written paper,
and also a blank sheet of paper to sake a copy upon. He
gave me directions that I was to wMte it large ; I think he
said like a man I copied the document ho gave me.
Mr. Seger : Where ? Witness (weeping) : I copied is in
Mr. Monk's surgery Mr. Monk was up and down stairs
in his surgery while I wag copying it. I can't say posi-
tively in whose handwriting the copy was.
Mr. Seger : Can you form a belief whose handwriting
the copy was ?

Mr. Cross objected. The witness having said she could
not say in whose handwriting it was, the question should
not be put.
__ _

Mr. Seger did not press the question.
Mr. Cross : My friend means to ak whether it is in the
prisoner's handwriting. Before that question can ba asked,
he must know whether the witness knows the prisoner's
handwriting.
Mr. Seger handed the will to witness.
The Clerl was 'wire instructed to make a memorandum
as follows :

[The document produced by Mr. Winder on Friday last,
was here put into the hands of the witness, and she said,
" This is the copy I made,"l
Witness : The whole document is in my handwriting,
with the exception of the words, " Joseph Wilkinson,
Preston." and " RI ward Turner."
Mr. Began : There is the word " day" that seems to
have been put into the body of the will after the document
was made. Is that in your handwriting?
Witness: Yes.

Mr Seger : Was that omission pointed out to you ?
Witness : I don't remember ; but I think I discovered
it. I made the bracket to the attestation. ' I left the
dpcument with Mr. Monk when I had coped it. I can't
say whether the name "James Holden" was on the docu-
ment from which I copied. It was either on, or I was
directed to put it on by Mr. Monk. At that time I had
never before heard of Edward Turner. I did not see
Edward Turner sign this document. When I left it with
Mr. Monk, there was no writing on it but my own.
Mr. Cross declined to ask the witness any question.
On the evidence being read over to the witness, she said
she did not know.whether or not it was to consult Mr.
Monk that she called upon him. The words were, there-
fore, struck out of her evidence. She also said : I don't
know the handwriting "Joseph Wilkinson, Preston."
[Th, name of one of Ihe alleged witnesses.]
The following is a verbatim copy of the will :

That this is the last Will and Testament of me Edward Turner of
St Paul's Road It ed Maker of Preston in the C. unty of Lancaster I
direct my Executors ta pay all my just debts funeral and testa-
mentary expen-es as soon after my decease as may he convenient and
it is my Wi I and desire that my said Executors pay to my God-
Daughter Elizabeth Wilkinson of Preston the sum of len Pounds in
TNT) months after my decease. I then order and direct my Executor t
to pay to my Hoasekr eper Alice Cl adwick the sum of Three sh'ilings
per week and all the rest residue and remainder of my real and
personal eutate I give absolu ely to homas Monk Surgeon of Preston
in the County of Lancaster and I Appoint Tfionais Clark Iron and
Brass Founder of Preston and Thomas Monk Surgeon both in the
County of Lancaster to be my Executors under this my last Will and
Tes'amtnt and I hereby declare that the receipt or receipts in writing
of my maid Executors far any rnonins payable to them under or by
virtue of ild3 my Will shall be an effectual discharge and I hereby
declare that my said Executors may re'mburse them elves out of the
monies which s all come to their hands under this my Will all
expences which may be incurred by them in and about the said
Executorship—ln Witness whereof I the said Edward Turner the
Testator have :o this my last Will and Testament set my hand and
Seal this fourteenth day of Febrnary in the year of Our Lord one
thousand eight hundred and fl Ity-five
Signed published anrt dec'and by me the \
said Edward 'hinter the Testator as I

and for ills last Will and Test,mens in
the pre3ence of us present at the vine (Seal.)
Edward Turner
time and in hi,4 presence and
in tile tre:ence of ecah other have

hereant; subscribed our names as wit-

James Holden Joseph Wliklns-n
Freston preston
Mr. Seger said he had now, he thought, established an

At LEWIS & COMPANY'S, Ranolagh-street.
ROTS are CLOTHED from the Ages of Six to Twenty Year

ample case for commitment. He had a considerable body
of evidence to produce if the magistrates thought it
necessary. It would be justice to Mr. Monk that it
should be produced now, or that he should have a copy of
it before the trial ; bat it was quite needless to take full
details of that evidence, if his friend on the other side
would • take an undertaking that the prosecution would
give him a copy of it, together with st'l other evidence
that had already been laid before the court.
,Mr. Cross said he had watched this case very carefully
for the accused from the first. It was a very painful case
—painful as his friend Mr. Seger observed on Friday last,
to all concerned—painful to Mr. Segar, painful to himself,
painful to the accused, and, perhaps more than anyone
else, to the Bench themselves. It was not his intention
to take up more of the time of the Bench in commenting
upon the evidence now, or in offering the evidence
of any witnesses on behalf of the accused. Unless Mr.
Monk could leave that court, not only discharged, but
restored to' his own position, it was nothing to him.
However painful it might be to him to remain in custody
until the trial at the assizes, on a charge of so grave a
character, that was nothing to the graveness of the stake
now at issue. He was advanced in years, and had
risen to a high position in the town. He could only
have one object, that of clearing his character, and
that investigation he (Mr. Cress) believed would have
to be made elsewhere. As the evidence stood at pre-
sent, he could hardly ask the Bench to discharge the
prisoner—he was sure he could not ask them to discharge
him as he (Mr. Monk) would wish. His character must
be cleared elsewhere, and he (Mr. Cross) would not
take up more of their time in making observations,
or in opposing a commitment. There would be an oppor-
tunity when he (Mr. Monk) could be heard in his
defence, when, he trusted, he would be able to clear his
character of this grave and serious charge. When he
(Mr. Cross) said that he did not intend to resist a commit-
ment, he trusted that that would not be taken as any
admission of Mr. Monk's guilt, and he also trusted that
every one who had heard the case, or had read about it,
would withhold their judgment and suspend their opinion
until the accused had had an ample opportunity of laying
the facts before a competent tribunal.
Mr Cross here sat down, but immediately rose again,
and addressing the Bench, said : Allow me one moment.
My friend said that a copy of the evidence would be given
to us in full time. I trust we shall have it in time before
the trial. I will accept Mr. Segar's promise on the point
as an undertaking.
Mr. Ascroft said :1 undertake to produce all books and
papers in due time.
After a short consultation between Mr. Cross and the
solicitor for the defence,

Mr. Cross again rose, and, addressing Mr. Ascroft, said :
Yoa have his (Mr, Monk's) day bosik and papers. You do
not want them?

Mr. Ascroft : Yes, I think we do. Yon may have access
to them at my office, but we cannot give them up.
The Msgistrates' Clerk (Mr. Dodd) then began to read
over the depositions, when
Mr. Cross said : As a matter of form .I renew my appli-
cation for bail. I cannot urge anything further than I
did on Friday last, and perhaps the decision of the Bench
may be the same. I make the application as a matter of
form. _

The Bench, after a few minutes' consultation, said they
were sorry to intimate that they must confirm the decision
to which they had come to on Friday last.
The Clerk then proceeded with the evidence. On going
through Mr. Fisher's testimony, he was instructed by the
Bench to make this memorandum :

" The prisoner not producing the document referred
to in the notice to produce it, served on him by Mr.
Gibbons, the examination of this witness was proceeded
with "

At the conclusion of the reading of the depositions,
The Bench then addressed the prisons; asking him, in
the usual form, if he had anything to say to the charge
preferred against him.

Mr. Blacihurst (in the absence of Mr. Cross, who had
left the court,) stated that Mr. Monk would reserve any
remarks he might have to make until the assizes.
The question was then put formally to the prisoner, who
declined to say anything.
Mr. Ascroft said there were a number of witnesses in
attendance on both days of the examination, and he had
an application to make for their expenses. He_ would
Submit the names of the witnesses to Mr. Dodd.

Mr. Peter Catterall (on the Bench) : What authority
have we to make an order for the payment of witnesses
who have not been sworn ?
Mr. Aseroft said he must call them anti have them
sworn then. He would simply call the parties, and
ask them if they had attended in this case, and the
magistrates could take the matter into consideration
afterwards.

Mr. Catterall (to Mr. Ascroft) : You must certify that
they are proper witness.
Mr. Ascroft : Oh ! yes ; I might put in an affidavit
before you afterwards. I think lam bound to make the
application afterwards. . _

"kr. Catterall: Certainly, and if we have power we shall
order the payment of those expenses.
Mr. Ascroft then called the following witnesses, some
of whom. had been in attendance on that day alone, and
others on both the days of hearing :--Henry Adler, Hat-
ton Garden, London, engraver; James Reay, Commerce
Court, Liverpool,: secretary to the Liverpool Guardian
Society; Henry Heap, 43, High street, Preston, an appren-
tice as a reedmaker to the late Sergeant Turner; Hy. Wil-
kinson, 132, Laneaßter-road, Preston, manufacturer; John
Oddie, Fulwood Barracks, private 6th Regiment of Foot ;
Thomas Baines (called, but 'did not, appear); Alice Chad-
wick, housekeeper to the deceased, Walker-street, Pres-
ton, widow; Anne Appleby, 205, St. Paul's-road, Preston,
married woman; Margaret Gulland, 203, St. Paul's-road.
Preston, widow; Joseth Williamson (tilled. but did not
appear);, Andrew Chadderton, 32, East-view, Preston,
weaving master ; John Hayhurst, Cobden-street, Preston,
shoemaker, (called, but did not appear); James Johnson,
Stanley-place, assistant oversew; William Jackson. 17,
Pereey-street. Preston, reed-maker ; James Holden, sour.,
16, Great George's-street, Preston,' twisteiin.; James
Holden, jun., 16, Great George's-street, Preston, weaver;
James Holden, 51, St. Mary's-street, Preston (called but
did not appear) ; James Holden, 41, St. Mary's.street,
Preston (called but did not appear); James Holden, 26,
Hudson-street, Preston, plumber.
The whole of the witnesses present were bound over in
their own recognisances to give evidence at the ttial.; Mr.
Pipe gave bail in the sum of £2OO for the appearance of
his wife at the assizes.

Mr. Pipe wished it to be distinctly understood that he
was quite ignorant of the affair.

The Bench said they had nothing to do with that.
Mr. Monk was then committed to take his trial at the
next Lancaster assizes.

BANKRUPTS.

By British and Irish 71Iagnetie Telegraph.

Thomas Bull, St. Mary Axe, vinegar merchant.
Samuel Farnan, Mineing•lane, Colonial br,,ker.
William Bromley Faller, Lime-s.reet, City, merchant.
William Grundy, Birmingham, lace man.
William Follett Bognor, bookseller.
Miles Lambert, Liverpool, tailor.
Samuel Welton Johnston, Birmingham, printer.
William Shaw, Sheffield, oil cake dealer.
Jeremiah Hill, Quidhampton, Ramway, contractor.
John Wright, Barbican, tobacco manufacturer.
William Smith and John Newey, Sinethwick, Staffordshire,
soap manufacturers.
Robert Huntley, Hove, near Brighton, shipowner.
John Shoard, Bristol, miller.
Andrew Ogle, James Robinson, and William Ogle, Preston,
Lancashire, engineers.
John Blackwell, Portsmouth, upholsterer.
Hugh Pickering, John Pickering, Richard Caton Picker-
ing, and John Wilson Pickering, Burnley, Lancashire,
cotton spinners.
Hugh Pickering, Spring Gardens Mill, Burnley, brush
maker.
Thomas Ross, West Hartlepool, sail maker.

BANKRUPTCIES ANNULLED.
Oliver Morgan Lilly, and Elizabeth Eleanor M'Dowall
Bristol, thither merchants.

RECORD OF WRECKS.—During the month of November
the number of wrecks reported was 163. For the south
of January the number was 286 ; in February, 2(1) ; in
March, 209; in April, 168 ; in May, 92 ; in June, 122 ;
in July, 82 ; in August, 139 ; in September, 122 and in
October, 247—making a total, during the present year,
of 1,835.
A SURGEON AT HALIFAX CHARGED WITH A dRICACR OF
THE GAME Laws —On Saturday last, at the Vest Riding
magistrates' court, Halifax, Mr. Thomas nobles Uresswell,
a surgeon of extensive practice, was char;ed with tres-
passing in pursuit of game, o❑ the 181 h lA., in Pudding
Park Wood, the game preserve of J. P Edwards, Esq.
The defendant, who is certificated, was sooting upon land
of Smith Ha 1, Esq., adjoining those of tie prosecutor, on
the day in question. A pheasant he shot fell into Mr.
Edwards's preserves, and he went to Otch it. The game- ,
keeper disputed his right to the bin ; but at length the
defendant got away with it, leaving Is tail in the hands of
the 'keeper. Ultimately the case Was dismissed, as the
magistrates were equally divided, uree being in favour of
a conviction, and three against.

Exelasively for CLOTHING Boy, from Six to Twenty Tears
LEWIS & COMPAN• Haßelagh-street.