The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1806-03-17 00:00:00

YORK ASSIZIS.

These assizes commenced on Saturday. the 1!..h
inst.—The following are among the trials that wok
place :
Willow darker was ;Mitred for ernhezzlinr nen-

ney entrusted to his care, the property of emirs.
Jarratt, Dawson, and Hardy, in whose service be
was as a confidential Ferran*.
William Barker. the prisoner. was employed by
Messrs. Jarrat, Dawson, and Ilardy. proprietors of
some extensive Iron-works near Bradford, as a cies k
and traveller : he had been in their service about
theee years, and an almost unliorired confidence
wis placed in him, until the circumstance occurred
which led to the present prosecution.
It was proveJ by Mr Monies. agent to the
house, tha: at was the usual practice of the Prisoner,
and of the other clerks in the house, when they re-
turned from a journey, to account with the cashier
on the following day, when they entered in a honk,
kept for the purpose, t'e several sums of money
received, and the names of the persons of whom they
were so received.
On the 20th of July, 1805, the Prisoner received
foam Mrs. Perkingron, of Halifax, the sum of 361.
10s. on account of his employer, and for which stun
he never accoutred.
To prove this part of the cue,
Mr. Perkington, son of Mrs. Perkinroo, of Hali-
fax, who paid the money to the Prisoner, was called,
who proved the payment of the sum in question to
the Priscner ; and Mr. Firth, cashier to the house,
who produced the book in which the entry of the
name and sum ought ro have been made, but in
which there was no such entry.
But the most material part of the evidence against
the Prisoner was a letter addressed to Mr. Tarrat,
one of the partner, in the firm ; in which letter, the
Prisoner casts himself npon his mercy, and gives a
list cf several persons of wnom he had received mo-
ney, for which be had not accounted to his employ.
err. and which money he confessed to have applied
to his -wn use. The penitent style of this letter,
and the anguish of mind under which it appear-
ed to be written, strongly excited the feelings of
the Court. Another letter of the Prisoner's, ad-
dressed to one of his fellow-clerks, was also read ;
the purport of this letter was to ri quest him to
make some alteration in several entries in the led-
ger and day-book, to conceal from his employers
the extent of the embezzlements in which he bad
involved himself.
This letter appears to have been written previous
to that I.eforejnentinned.
Alter the Darned Judge ha l recapitulated the
evidence, and made inch observations as the
case suggested; the Jury without leaving the
box, found the Prisoner Quip, but recommended
hint to the mercy of the Court; arid the Counsel fee
the ptosecution said. be was authorised to state,
that the Prosecutor joined most sincerely in this is-
commendation.
Turrinss Writiarre was inelietad ens highway rob-
bery. The only material witness in this caw, was
the Prosecutor himself, John Hetchinson, who
stated, that ou the 'Teeing of Saturday. the 25th of
February, he spent three hours in a public-house.
in Meadow-lane, in cnmpiany with the Prk_3lter.
and. in thq period. he fun three pints of bes-r.
Ahout eleven o'clock in the eveni.l, he woos Brea'

I
-

• •c• !•• , tie Prisoner came out, and
the syswess to go to his lodging, with which
he complied; after this, at the solicitation of the
Prisoner, the witness accompanied him to a pu'dic-
house in Leeds, where they got some beer. When
they had got part of the way, on their return to
Meadow-lane, the Prisoner proposed to go a more
private road, than the dire& way ; this being
consented to, the Prisoner and Witness went toge-
ther ; when they arrived at the Quakers' burs-
ing-grs;und, the Prisoner stopped the Witness,
and took from him, by force, his watch, sixpences
and a tobacco-box. in the morning, the Witness,
accompanied by a frield, went to the Prisoner's
lodging, for the purpose of :vowel ing the watch ;
but the Prisoner said he was very drunk, and knew
nothing of the matter. hut if he had really thrown
the watch over the wall, they might perhaps find it ;
upon this sugg !stain, the Persecutor and his friend
searched the field, where they supposed it to have
been thrown, but without cffeet.
The Judge, in h's observations upon the evidence,
said, that the Witness's anicealment of the circum-
stance of the Prisoner's throwing the watch over
the wall, took something from the general weight
of his evidence ; more especially as the Prosecutor
acknowledged, that he was not perfectly sober ; and
it was possible, that the whole might be little m,•re,•
on the part of the Prisoner, than a drunken frolic,
as it was difficult to conceive what possible motive
he could have in stealing the watch, and after he
had got It into his possession, should immediately
throw it away, in the presence of the person from
whom he had so taken it. His Lordship further ob-
served, that the very good charaßer given of the
Prisoner by Humphrey, Esq. Lieutenant in the
same rezimenr, outit, in a Case, which at most,
seemed very doubtful, to have some weight in de-
termining it.
Ihe Jury, wishotit le tring the box, ac fputted the
Prisoner .