The Sun.
London, England, 1839-08-26 00:00:00

BOW- STREET.

EXTENSIVE FORGERIES.—EXTRAORDINARY No.
cEEDiNG.s.--.James Allen, the person who stands
charged with forging several cheques for a large amount
on Messrs. Drummond and Co., and other bankers, Was
brought up for further examination. Mr. Humphries,
the solicitor, attended on the part of the prisoner. No
further evidence was offered, Mr. Bush, the solicitor
for the prosecution being at present out of town, and
the prisoner was, with his own consent, again remanded
for a week. At a former examination it was stated that
he was suspected to be one of a gang of fellows who
have recently succeeded in passing several forged cheques,
a from what took place, there can be little doubt of
the
fact. Some time after the prisoner had been re-
moved from the bar a Jew attctrney, named Jonas, en-
tered the office, and representing himself as the pri-
scner' a
s solicitor, asked to be allowed to see him, but the
Magistrate (Mr. Minshull) very properly refused the
application. Jonas went away, but returned again in

about an hour, accompanied by Mr. Prendergast, the
barrister, who had a very long brief to defend the pri-
soner. Mr. Minshull inquired of the Learned Gentle-
man for whom he attended, when he replied for a person
named James Allen, who was charged with forgery.
Mr. MINSHULL inquired from whom he received his
instructions, and he said from Mr. Jonas, the solicitor,
who was then standing by his side.
Mr. MINSHULL said the prisoner's case had already
been disposed of, he had been placed at the bar, Mr.
Humphries, the solicitor, had attended on his behalf,
and had consented to his being remanded for a week.
Jonas again declared that he had been instructed to
employ counsel to defend the prisoner (he did not say
by whom).
Mr. Prendergast said it was a most extraordinary
thing. He had received a brief, and instructions to
attend the prisoner's re-examination that day.
Mr. MINSHULLsaid he knew nothing about that, but
he would send the gaoler to the prisoner to inquire what
solicitor he had employed to defend him. The gaoler
went to the cell accordingly, and returned, stating that
the prisoner informed him that Mr. Humphries was his
solicitor ; upon which Jonas again begged to be allowed
to have an interview with the prisoner, in order, as he
said, that he might hear it from his own lips.
Mr. MINSISULL said that if he (Mr. Jonas) doubted
the correctness of the gaoler's statement, the prisoner
should be brought in and speak for himself, but that
neither Mr. Prendergast or Jonas would be allowed to
put any question to him. The prisoner was brought
in accordingly, and Mr. Minshull, addressing him, said,
Have you employed any solicitor to conduct your de-
fence ? Prisoner—l have.

Mr. MINSHIILL—Who have you employed? Pri-
soner—Mr. Humphries.
Jonas here attempted to say something to the pri-
soner, when

Mr. MINSHULL said—Sir, I cannot allow you to have
any communication with the prisoner after what he has
just stated.
Mr. Prendergast said, of course, after the priso er's
statement there was an end of the business, as far as he
(Mr. Prendergast) was concerned. Mr. Prendergast
then left the office, followed by Jonas.
In less than an hour afterwards a third solicitor made
his appearance, and inquired when the examination of the
prisoner Allen would take place ; and on being informed
that it was over long ago, expressed his astonishment,
and said that he had been instructed to attend and de-
fend him. He was informed by one of the officers that
two other attorneys had already attended for the same
purpose ; on hearing which he affected to be still more
astonished, but left the office without making any appli-
cation to the bench upon the subject.
From the extraordinary measures taken to secure the
prisoner legal assistance, and the anxiety manifested to
obtain an interview with himot is evident that some of
his companions are afraid orThlit. The legal gentle-
men, who had na doubt been sent by them, were, how-
ever disappointed, as no person was allowed to see him
except Mr. Humphries. The trick attempted to be
practised is quite a novel one. The prisoner evidently
was not aware of it, or he would not so promptly have
disclaimed all knowledge of his would-be legal advisers.
POLICE TESTIMONY UNDER. THE NEW BILL.—A
young woman, named Sarah Wilson, of very respect-
able appearance and manners, was charged by police-
constable F 114, with being a common prostitute, and
stopping gentlemen in the Strand. The policeman said
he believed her to be a prostitute, from having seen her
frequently in the Strand in the evening. The prisoner burst
into tears on hearinghis statement, and in the most solemn
manner declared that she was not the character he
had represented her to be ; that she resided with her
father and mother, and got her living by needlework.
She admitted that the policeman might often have seen
her in the Strand of an evening, as that was in her road
home from the house where she was employed.—The
gaoler and other officers belonging to the above esta-
blishment said that they did not know anything of her,
and had never seen her there before, upon which an-
other policeman said he believed her to be a prostitute,
but could assign no better reason than his companion.
The poor girl was, notwithstanding her protestations,
committed to the House of Correction for one month.
On hearing the sentence she fell back fainting in the
arms of the gaoler, and was carried out of the office
in a state of insensibility.
A number of young women were sent for one month
to the House of Correction for " stopping and solicit-
ing" gentlemen in the street ; and two young men, who
gave their names Henry Johnson and Charles illirvin,
were fined 40e. each for ringing the bells of several
houses in the Strand at two o'clock yesterday morning,
and in default of payment sentenced to one month at
the mill. They paid the fine.