The National Register.
London, England, 1822-07-08 00:00:00

THE NATIONAL RE(

to a police-office. When he went with some friends, i
the prisoner was from home, but soon returned, when
prosecutor told him he wished to see some lawns he had
in his possession ; he produced part of them, when wit-
ness said, "'These are my property—they have never
been soil;" he said there was in his idea a great many
lame of the same kind, and insisted on seeing them.
This conversation took place in a back room, after which
witness proceeded to the shop and insisted on a search,
when he timid a variety of shawls and muslin', which
ho identified as his property by the private marks made
by himself. Witness told him he must have taken them
whilst in his employ, as they had never been sold. One
of the parcels was of the value of 121. Except some
diaper, all the articles named in the indictment were
totnid on that day, but the articles hi the indictinent did
not comprise one tenth part of those that were frund.
The prisoner fell down on his knees and begged pardon.
The valuation of the articles in the indictment was con-
siderahly under the market price. As the prisoner owed
him a considerable riill, he took a warrant of attorney
for 1001. on which he entered up nalemem, and put a
111411 in possession. The warrAtt was requested in order
to put hint in the same condition as the other creditors,
inasmuch as at that time he owed witness auout 5001.,
which was twice as much as he owed any other creditor.

Cross-examined by Mr. Alley.—l did not promise not
to enter any process :igainst him when he gave the war-
rant of attorney. There was no understanding that I
should not put in a distress under six mouths; it was to
be left at my otrn discretion. Toe goods, the subject of
this indictment, were in my possession at the time the
warrant was given. There was no promise that he
should not be prosecuted at any time during the nego-
tiation. I had no objection to Mr. Harmer being present
on behalf of the prisoner. I took an assikitment of the
residue of his property, with the approbation of all the
creditors who signed it.
Thomas Oldham examined.—Witness was formerly
in the employ of Mr. Mitchell, and went, about May
last, to assist the prisoner in his business; saw a great
quantity of goods, which hid been the properly of Mr.
M., and among them the articits mentioned at the in-
dictment.
Thomas Hine deposed, that he was formerly in the
employ of the prosecutor, but was now in burniess on
his on ti account. He saw several articles in the shop of
Milian which were the property of Mr. Mitchell, and
not enterer, in the invoices which contained an entry of
all their transactions. The pi isoner called on witness,
and begged him to intercede with Mr. Mitchell not to
prosecute; he did so, but that gentleman would make
no engagement.
Tue goods were produced and idemified by the prose-
' color, and he WAS quite 'positive he net er sold goods of
that fine texture to the prisoner.
' This was the case for the prosectitiol.
Toe prisoner put in a written defence, which set forth,
that by honesty, frugally, &c. he hail reabzed a suili•
clew property to go into business. It went on to state
declarations of his innocence.
S?veral witnesses were called, who gave the prisoner
a most excellent character.
Tue Recorder summed up the evidence, and the Jury,
after considerable hesitation, returned a verdictol Guilty,
but recommended the prisoner to mercy.
The Court could tint accede to the pioposal, for it was
necessary, in a commercial country like this, to visit
with extreme punishment those tuba had so tar forgot-
ten their duty as the prisoner had toward Alr.M
Alter the prisoner was removed from the liar, the pro-
secutor stated he had t.iacovered property to the amount
of 3uul•