The National Register.
London, England, 1811-09-29 00:00:00

THE IViTioNAL RE

the Coffee-house was set up for my son, but that I was the owner
of it.

Cross Examiited by Andrews.

Are you not an uncertilicated Bankrupt ?
[Here Mr. ALLEY interfered, declaring he would not suffer
his client to answer any improper or illegal questions. 3
Mr. Kendall—l am not, nor never was a Bankrupt.
The Cas.hier of Messrs. Drummond produced the booltS of
that firm, from which it appeared that Andrews had no account
Kith that house since the .gth of January 1E08; there then re-
-trtained a balance in his favour of Se. 6d. which he afterwards
drew • the whole of his account amounted to about 30751.; he
sometimes lodged 5001. or 6(./01. together, but generally drew tut
the money he lodged one day, the day after.
Here the prosecution c:osed, and the prisoners being Called on
for their defence,

Andrews Gddressed the Court and Jury.. He confessed
he had written the draft on the Banker, and that the statement
of the prosecutor was in part co,.rect, and in part false. As far
as related to his giving the checque, and the balance being paid
to Hall, he admitted ; but as to the crime itself, he denied it
altogether. He had not obtained the money under any fah:e
pretence whatever; he had kept cash at the Bankers, as had
been proved, nor was there any extraneous aid used to. Induce
the prosecutor to pay the money. He expressed this. acknuw •
lodgments to Mr. Alley, for the very humane and handsome
manner m which he treated. his case. He regretted that his un-
fortunate friend (Hall) should he led into such a situation ; and,
thinking it useless to waste the time of the Cool t with further
observation, he threw himself entirely en their mercy.
Gull said, he had nothing to offer in his defence. He
should call no witnesses, as he had not an opportunity, or means
-of procuring any.
The CU AIRMAN, having summed up the evidence, left it to
the Jury to decide on the tact, whether they could conic to the
conclusion, that these persons had (according to the charge in
the indictment) obtained money under fake prin‘lices.
The Jury immediately found a verdict of Guitiy against both
the prisoiets.
'1 hey were nett indicted for obtaining money 00) under
false pretences from Mr. Brendel, of Blackwall.
Mr. Guy. NEY having stated the case on the pdrt of the prose-
,
anion,
Mr. Brendel, the prosecutor, being sworn, stated, that he
Piept the Artichoke Tavern at Blackwall, and upon Monday,
the 12th of August last, the prisoners came to his house,
and after bespeaking a Witte dinner for some of his friends
on the following Thursday, for which they, agreed to pa; one
guinea a head, exclusive of wine, they ordered a spaali dinner
for themselves. In the course of conversation the prisoner
(Andrews) told him he expected a letter in the coun:e of the
evening, which would he directed under cover to him (the
witness), and they told him their names, Mr. Andre': s and
Mr. Hall. After dinner they asked him to take Wine Mtn them,
to *hich he assented, and in the mean time the messenger iir-
fived with the expected letter; he tuck off the cover, and the
enclosure was directed to" Richard Andrews, Esq." Andrews
opened the letter, and having read it, said it was from a parti.:
Cular friend, who wanted 501. to complete a most advantageous
purchase, whfch he should forfeit unless he had that sum inane-
diateli; then turning to Hall, Andrews asked him if he had
any money, to which the former answered he had got but 101.
about Lim, and pulling out hispocket-book gave Andrews a 101.
Bank note, Andrews produced 101. more, and apparently in a
great dilemma expressed muck regret that he coin not
send his friend the wlrole sum he had written for, as it' he
failed in the purchase, it would be attended with a great loss.
Andrews then asked the witness to accommodate him with
SOl. and he would give him a cheque on his hanker for rul.
Which he could receive the next day, it being then past banking
hours. To this the witness, not suspecting any thing from the
respectable appearance and manners of the prisoners, asst wed ;
Le gave Andrews the 301. and the latter drew a cheque on
Messrs, Biddulph- and Co. for 501 which Hall indorsed, the
201. balance being understood to go towards payment of the
turtle dinn.r, and to defray the expenses cf tha: day's dinner,
which amounted to 11. 151. including four bottles of wine. lie
went to the bank with the cheque the next morning, w hen he
elkcovcred that Andrews had kept no cash there for several
years; of course, finding he had been thus imposed upon, he did
--ovide Lhe ..rtle

not provide Lhe turtle feast.
Mr. Smith, clerk to Messrs. Bidduiph, proved that Andrews
kept an account at their house five years ago; that the accurst
was closed on the 6th November, 1806, when he had overdrawn
831 which he afterwards paid, and took up the bills then in their
hands; the witness could not tell where the prisoner lived at
that time, hut Mr. Andrews said he then resided in Rusiell-
reet, Bloontsbury.
The prisoners urged nothing in their defence. and the Jury
kuud both Guilty.