The Sun.
London, England, 1837-11-02 00:00:00

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

MANSION-HOUSE.
A young man, named James Wheater, was brought be-
fore the LORD MAYOR, in the custody of John Forrester,
under the following remarkable circumstances :—Mr. John
Jackson Lee, a solicitor, stated that the case against the
prisoner was one of an extraordinary kind, and compre-
hended a great number of forgeries. The prisoner was
agent or servant to his father, a merchant in Yorkshire,
who was in the habit of sending goods from that place to
his son, at No. 31, Aldermanbury, London, and of receiv-
ing in return from his son acceptances which, when the
rather became a bankrupt, were ascertained to be forgeries.
Witness was solicitor to the Commission,and came to town
by the direction of the assignees to take possession of what-
ever property was in the house, the bankrupt having made
an assignment of it. Upon looking over the goods which
were at No. 31, Aldermanbury, lie found several bills of
exchange, purporting to be accepted some by a Mr. Baker
and others by a Mr. Brown, of No. 31, Aldermanbury ;
and upon inquiry lie found that there was no person named
Baker at that address, and that although there was a
Thomas Brown there lie was a boy no more than fourteen
years of age. One of the bills was for 971. Gs., dated 6th
May, 1837, and made payable in three months to order,
s'ened James Wheater, and directed to Mr. Baker, 31,
Aldermanbury, City.
Mr. Wontner, the solicitor who attended for the pri-
sonar, asked whether that bill had not been paid?
Mr. Lee said be could not tell whether it was paid or
not. It was amongst the assets of the bankrupt, Joshua
Wheater. Twit a system of forgery was carried on by the
prisoner there existed no suspicion until the bills were found.
Witness found a bill book on the premises, in which the
hill produced had been entered.
Mr. Wontner—The bill you produce was found on the
premises in which it was made payable? Witness—lt was.
Mr. ,Wontner—That is prima facie e‘idence that it was
paid, and whether the acceptance is genuine or not does
not signify, as no fraud could have been contemplated ?
‘Vitness—The whole plan shows a regular system of fraud.
The prisoner had a room in the house No. 31, Alderman-
bury, which consists of a set of chambers, and is the prc-
perty of Mr. Brown, the CommOn Councilman, a respec-
table man, who has been there for several years, and who
stated that he knew nothing of any of the persons whose
names were on the bills. But I also saw a boy, about 14
years of age, named John Brown, who turns out to be
the prisoner's servant, and Who was in the habit of accept-
ing these bills, by his master's order.
The LORD MAYOR—Were any Of these bills paid, when
they arriied at maturity? Mr. Lee—Apparently some
have been paid. There is one of the bills for 1801. the ac-
ceptance of this boy. Bills of this description were sent
by the prisoner to his father, who got money upon them at

banking houses, and was thus enahied to purchase goods
extensively, which goods were immediately forwarded from
Yorkshire to London. There were no means of taking up
these bills, except by the misappropriation of the property
of the bankrupt's creditors.

Mr. Wontner could not see that there was evidence o
fraud in these transactions.

Mr. Lee—The bankrupt's creditors have lost 14,000/.
by them. From the 31st of July to the sth of September
the prisoners had raised upwards of 3,0001. through rn.:T.ns
of these bill .

Mr. Lee said that a short time would bring to light a
deal more about these transactions, and he requested that
the prisoner might be remanded for some days, as the bank.
rupt's examination was to Like place on the 7th instant.
Mr. Wontner proposed that bail should he taken, hut
The LORD M Avon. could not accept of bail under th
circumstances, and remanded the prisoner until the I I th insi