The Sun.
London, England, 1862-11-01 00:00:00

POLICE IN7ELLIGENCE.—Oct. 31.

_ -
GUILDHALL—SERIOUS CHARGE OF FORGERY
AGAINST A BANKRUPT. —Edward Braundbeck,
lately carrying on business as a dealer in sewing
machines, at 27, Walbrook, was brought up on a
habeas from Whitecross-street Prison, and charged
bill of exchange for £lB 15s. 6d., with
before Alderman Hale with feloniously forging and
uttering
adefraud Messrs Pitt, sewing-machine ma-
nufacturers, of Cleckheaton, in Yorkshire.
Mr. Benham conducted the prosecution, and said
the prisoner had been doing business with his
clients, and in June last had incarred a debt with
them to the amount of £5O. Early in July he
called upon them at Cleckheaton, and expressed a
desire to extend his credit with them, which
they declined, and at the same time offered to
let him have further goods if he was prepared to
reduce his account, upon which he gave them two
bills of exchange, one for £lB 15s. 6d., and the
other for £l6 10s., upon the faith of which securi-
ties they allowed him to have other goods, to the
amount of about £3O, and up to the present time
their claim against him amounted to about £llO.
The bill for £16105., although perfectly worthless,
he would say nothing about, but the £lB bill, was
the one open which the charge of forgery was al-
leged. That bill was drawn by the prisoner, and
purported to be accepted by a firm of the name of
"W. Peters and C 0.," of 25, George-street, Com-
ruereial-read, Landon. He would, however, show
that Commercial-road East was intended, and that
not only was there no such number as 25 in the
George-street indicated, but no such person as
Peters and Co. had ever carried on business or re-
sided at any house in that street. The handwriting
of the drawer and acceptor was identically the ,
same, and he would call witnesses who would state
that bo.h were in the handwriting of the prisoner,
and that he admitted that Peters and Co. were alto-
gether a myth. If he proved these facts to the satis-
faction of the Court, he would ask that the prisoner
should be committed to take his trial for forgery. 1
Mr. Joseph Pitt, in partnership with his brothers,
said—l saw the prisoner at Cleckheaton about the
7th July last. Me said he wanted some more ma-
chines ; but, as he owed us about £4B, I asked him
he had. two bills for £l6 'Nand £lB 15s. 6d, which
what he proposed doing about his account. He said
he said were good bills. He also said he knew the
acceptors of the bills, and that they were as good as
the Bank of England. After 'his he endorsed the
bill ' to us ; but neither of them were paid when due.
Ups ) the faith of those bills being genuine we al-
lowed him to have goods to the amount of £3O. I
asked the prisoner in what direction the Commer-
cial-road was, and he told me down Whitechapel
I way. I went there and found George street, but no
25. I went to 24, and made diligent inquiries
elsewhere, but could not ascertain anything of " W.
Peters and Co. ;" no such person being known in
that street. I have commenced proceedings against
the prisoner in one of the superior courts, but this
bail is not included in that suit. The prisoner was
taken on a capias, and is now in Whitecross-street
Prison on my suit against him. I know he has re-
cently become a bankrupt. The bill fell due on
the 4th of October; but having paid it away I
could not commence these proceedings until it was
returned to me, and this is the reason I did not
preter this charge earlier.
Herbert Wilkinson was ealled merely to prove
that to the best of his belief; from his knowledge of
the prisoner's handwriting, the acceptance to the
bill produced had been written by the prisoner.
James Christmas, formerly in the prisoner's em-
ploy corroberated the last witness on the ques-
tion of the acceptance being in the prisoner's hand-
writing, and added that about the latter part of
August he was asking the prisoner what means he
had of meeting certain claims, and went through
his bill-book, with him. While stating which bills
would and which would not be paid, he came upon
the one in question
and
and that he should have to
and remarked that " W. Peters
and Co." Were nobody,
pay that bill himself. He thought nothing of it
' at rru
the
h time, deeming it an accommodation bill.
A omas Lay, principal warder at the Whitecross-
istreet Prison, proved that the prisoner was brought
there on the 4th of October, and had remained in
the custody of the sheriffs ever since.
Mr. Geo. Hall, managing clerk to Mr. Bartley, a