The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-07-13 00:00:00

CHARGE OF FORGERY.

(Continuation of a cane at the Mansion-house.)
This case was sent down for trial to Manchester,
(In Sunday the prisoner William Williams Perk arrived,
and wan, on the following day, brought up for examination before
Mr. Foster and Mr. Brit rley.
Mr. GATE,. of London, the Solicitor to the London Amelia-
lion of Bankers, assisted by Sir. BAH 31 is, conducted the case for
the prosecution.
The first witness examined wns Mr. Joseph Peel. a clerk in the
bank of Masterman and Co., who said—On the 23.1 of June. 1 re-
ceived this letter (producing ale,tet) inclotting this check for 175/.
flu:porting to be drawn by Messrs. Wakefield and Sons, or
Kendal. On examination, I discovered that the check was a

forgery.
The letter and cheek (ofrather order), were then put in and read.
The letter was to the following effect:—
Respected friends, lklasterman and Co.
" As I shAll not be in London for a fortnight, I will esteem it a
favour if thou wilt remit me the amount of the inclosed draft by
return of past, to the Hen and Chickens, Birmingham, as I leave
Alert toanorrow fur that place, and by so doing thou wilt oblige
thy friend, " FitAxcis EVERSIIAM.
Eccles, fl mo. 21. 2f3.
Direct for me as above, to the care of John Smith,
" Mastermi n and Co. Bankers, London.
Tice order *as in the following terms :
" Metnirs. Masterman and Co.
"Gentlemen,—We will thank you to pay the bearer. Mr. Frs.
Erenham, one hundred and arventy-rice pounds, and place the
same to the credit of our account.—We are, your obedient servants,
"JOHN WALEFIELD and Solis.

" Kendal, June 19th, 18211."
Examination temmeti—M,ssrs. Wakefield and Sons are corre-
spondents of 3lessra. :klasterman and Co. If the document had
been a gt nem' order, the house would have paid it.
Mr. Gates—l am solicitor to the Association of Ba kers in
London. I was consulted by Messrs. Alasterman and Co. relative
to the forged order which had been transmitted to them. In con.
sequence of what passed on the occasion, a letter was made up, and
addressed to Francis Evesham, at the lien and Chickens, Bir-
mingham which letter I myself gave to Mr. Freeliog.
John flemilley—l am assistant to the post-mistress at Binning.
ham—lA letter given to witness.[—On the 21th of June I received
by post the letter now pot into my hands. The following letter
was then put in and read:—
" To the Postmaster, Post.office, Birmingham.
" Any letter thou receives for me, directed Hen and Chickens,
Birmingham, I will thank thee to send on to the Manches.er Yost.
office, as I shall not be at thy place for a week or a fottnight. By
collo-lug thou wilt oblige thy friend

" FRANCIS EVERSIIAM.

" Eccles. 6 mo. 22, 21;."
The letter bears the Manchester post-mark of the 234 June. I
received, by post from London, a letter directed Francis Evenham,
at the lien and Chickens, Birmingham, which I re-directed as that
letter desired, to the post-office, Manchester, and enclosed it in an
envelope; addressed to the post-minter at Manchester, and for-
warded it by, post to Manchester.
John Nightingale.—l am a c'erk in the post-office at Manches-
ter. I had a letter given up to me by my superior. direct..
ed " Francis Eversham, post-office, Manchester." I know
Gardner, the officer; he was at the post-office for three days
successi,yely. I had received directions what to do in case of an
application foe the letter. On the 28th of June, about five minutes
before ten o'clock in the evening, there was a knock at the window.
As soon as I opened it, a person who-stood at the outside said,
" Francis Eversbam, Post-office." Gardner, the officer, was in-
side the office at the time, and heard the application as well as my-
self. He immediately left the office and went round to the window.
In order to keep the person in play until he mud reach the spot, I
said to Mr. Brown, another clerk. " Are all the London letters
sorted ?" He said " No, there are a few here." I said to the
person at the window, " I'll look for it, Sir." I had the letter
then in my hand, but I wanted to detain hint without exciting his
suspicions. I returned to the window, and said, "Is the name
Event-am or Hever.ham: does it begin with an Eoran H ?"
The person at the win:'ow replied, " With an E." I saw Gardner
strive at the window, and saw hm standing beside the person who
applied foe the 'etter, so close that he could have put his arm round
him. I then read the direction of the letter, Francis Eversham.
P. s • ffice, Manchester," and said, "Is thst your letter. Sir ?"
He said 't Yen." I then told him the postage was three shil-
lings. He gave m. a half-crown and a sixpence, and I gave him
the letter. I then I .st sight of him and the officer: they both went
towards Eachange-street. There was no ether person near at the
time, and I am sure they went away together.
Richard Gardner—l am an officer at Bow-street, and was sent
down to Manchester to apprehend the person applying t'or a letter
directed Francis Everett:int." On the evening of the 26th June,
ab nit five or ten minutes before ten o'clock, I was sitti,g in the
Post-office, when I heard a person ask for the letter. 1 immedi-
ately tissue I Mr. Brown to light me out of the MSc..., and 1 went
round to the window. The prisoner at the bar was standing there;
no other person was near the window. I heard Nightingale read the
direction, and ask if that was his letter ; he said it was. I saw film
receive the letter, pay their, and put it in hisright hand small-clothes
pocket. I then said. " Mr. liversharn, I want a word with you." lie
said" What about ?" I seized him by the left arm, and said" I ant
an officer ; and you must consider yourself in my custody." He
inquired " What for ?" I said, " I cannot explain to you here;
you must go along with me, and then explain to you." He
walked very fast, and endeavoured to make his escape; but I kept
fast hold of his sleeve. There was a coach standing at the corner
of St. Ann's-square. I desired him to get into it ; he resisted, and
endeavoured to escape; but I got hint into it, and drove cif to the
police office. When we arrived there, I searched for the letter, but
could not find it, and have never seen it since. When I first got
into the coach I saw the prisower put his hand clenched, as if some-
thing was in it, to the window of the coach. 1 told hint to keep his
hands quiet, and he drew it back. I received a number of keys
front the prisoner, and went with Mr. Lavender to search his box.
We found these papers.
Sonic pieces of paper were then produced : one was a small piece
of bank post, exactly resembling in colour, texture, and quality,
the paper on which the forged order was written. Another was a
sheet of letter-paper, of the same size, texture, and quality as the
paper on which the letter to Illas'erman's and to the postmaster of
Birmingham were written ; and bearing also the sante watermark,
F. E. 1824." On these pieces of paper were written, in what
ppeared to be different hands-writing, the following names:—
S. T. Hobson and Co."—" Furt, Brothers, and Co."—" Rich-
rd Fort."—" Henry Fielding and Brothers."
Mr. Lavender—l assisted to search the' prisoner's apartments.
I saw the pieces of paper found which have been produced ; they
were in a little Sin by themselves. I found the paper which I now
hold in my hand )producing four or five sheets of letter-paper). It
is also of the same description nod watermark as that on which the
letters to Mastermane and the postmaster at Birmingham are writ-
ten. When the prisoner was brought to the police-office he told
me that he had gone to the post.office, to inquire for a letter from
his father, addressed to himself.
Nightingale being recalled, stated that no one had applied for a
letter at the post-office for more than a quarter of an hour before
the application for that directed for Francis Eversham, nor was
there any application afterwards that night.
Mr. Ilan mEa—That, Sir, is the case we have to submit to you
for the prosecution.
Mr. Asxwottrut, who appeared as Counsel for the prisoner, but
had hitherto abstained from inking any questions from the different
witnesses, now requested that Mr. Peel might be recalled, and
cross-examined him at considerable length. The witness stated, in
the course of his cross-examination, that he discovered the forgery
after a very short examination ; it was, in fact, not at all like the
hand-writing of Wakefield and Sons, and it was impossible for
imp person to be deceived by it who exercised proper caution. The
house of Masteman anti Co. never paid such an instrument
without advice; and he should have thought himself extremely
culpable if he had passed it ; but he had known things equally
absurd to succeed. lie did turn recollect having ever paid money
on such an order transmitted by post; it was usual for country
bankers to send orders for money in that ftion ; but they were
delivered by the payers personaliy4 anti not sent by post. Mr.
Ashworth then addressed the Magistrates at some length, con-
tending that, as the instrument was so absurd that no banker
would ever have thought of paying i:, no indictment for forgery
could be sustained, and he submit:. d they ought not to commit his
client for trial, even supposing the evidence which they had heard
to be true. In order to convict a man of forgery it was necessary
that there should be an intent to defraud, which intent must be
eitly•r shewn by direct evidence, or inferred from the facts of the
case ; but as no such inference could be fairly drawn from the evi-
dence in this case, it was far more probable that the thing was in-
tended by some one as a joke, for no person in his senses could ex-
pect such a ridiculous attempt to succeed.
Mr. FOSTER said he did not agree with Mr. Ashworth on that
point. His difficulty was not upon that part of the case. However
irregular it would have been to pay such an instrument, he could
not say that there was no intention to defraud on the part of the
person who bad forged it.
Mr. AsnmonTit then proceeded to cross-examine Nightingale
and Gardner at very considerable length, but did not elicit any
thing calculated to affect their evidence in chief. except that it ap-
peared the former did not know that the letter which he delivered to
the prisoner was the one which had been received by post from Bir-
mingham, the envelope in which it was enclosed having been
opened by 111r.Whitelock himself. During the cross-examinations,
however, Mr. Whitelock came into Court and supplied the de-
ficiency.
After the cross-examinations were gone through, Mr. Asti-
wo Writ again addressed the Magistrates, urging his former objec-
tion, that the instrument was void upon the face of it, anti contend-
ing that there ought to be some proof that the forgery was in the
band-writing of the prisoner. No such evidence had been oflered,
and the charge of forgery, therefore, could not be sustained.
Mr. HARDIER said there was still the charge of uttering.
Mr. AstiWORTII asked where the charge of uttering was? The
warrant was for forging anti causing to be forged ; and the exami-
nation in London was on a charge of forgery alone.
Mr. liars said the charge in London was for uttering alone,
and no other charge could haVe been sustained out of this county.
Mr. ASHWORTH then said lie would prove that the (erg d in.
strument was not is the hand-writing of the prisoner.
Mr. FOSTER suggested, that as no evidence had been e'er.d in
the affirmative, it was unnecessary to offer nejatite evident:
Mr. Peel was then reca le I by Mr. Fo.ter, an I ag tin stated that
the band.writing of the order was not 1 ke that of Wak, held an
Sons. 'Ole neart et resen.b:arce u'd tall 0 nfyd ras to the

.pp'!