The Sun.
London, England, 1853-06-16 00:00:00

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.—June 15.

Edwin, Henry Powell, 26, a young man of gentlemanly
appearance, described as a clerk, was indicted, together
with a person named Joseph Farrell, for forgery and
uttering a receipt for money, with intent to defraud.
In other counts of the indictment Farrell was charged
as a principal, and the prisoner was alleged, in the terms
of the statute, to have harboured, assisted, and com-
forted him, after the commission of the offence, he being
at the time aware that he had committed it.
Mr. Clarkson, Mr. Huddlestone, and Mr. Bayly con-
ducted the prosecution on behalf of the Bank of Eno.-
land ; the prisoner was defended by Mr. Ballantine and
Mr. Parry.

This case occupied the Court for several hours, and
nearly 30 witnesses were examined for the prosecution.
A great deal of the evidence, however, was of a formal
character, consisting of the tracing of notes, &c., and
the real facts upon which the charge contained in the
last mentioned counts in the indictment (which were all
that were relied upon) was sought to be established
against the prisoner lay in a very narrow compass. It
appeared that Farrell was engaged during the year 1851
as a supernumerary clerk in the Bank of England, and
he was employed in various branches of the establish-
ment, but principally in the dividend warrant office, and
consequently was well acquainted with the manner in
which the business was carried on. It seemed that a
gentleman named Davidson was possessed of a sum of
20,0001. in the Three per Cent. Consols, and that, for
some reason or other, ever since the year 1847 be had
not received any dividends upon his stock, and according
to the custom of the Bank the warrant for each half-
year's dividend as it became due was placed in a par-
ticular drawer. Farrell had ample opportunities of
becoming aware of the existence of these overdue war-
rants, and there appeared to be no doubt whatever
that he had got possession of them, and by availing him-
self of the knowledge of the modes of obtaining dividends
so overdue, and forging the signature of the gentleman
legally entitled to them, he succeeded in obtaining on
different occasions the sum of 2,300/., and it appeared
that in February last he absconded, and has, up to the
present period, evaded detection. There was no evi-
dence whatever to connect the prisoner with the forgery,
and the way in which it was attempted to support the
charge of being an accessory after the fact was by show-
ing that he was on very intimate terms with Farrell,
and that when the latter went away he accompanied
him in a gig, and that they travelled about to different
parts of the country ; and it also appeared that he had
sent a man to the Bank of England with a 501. note,
part of the produce of one of the forgeries, which he
desired him to get changed, and he told him if he was
asked any questions he was to say that he had received
the note from a person who was waiting outside the
bank. The clerk to whom application was made for
change was not satisfied with the account given him,
and detained the note, but it appeared that no steps
were taken to ascertain where the man came from, and
if this had been done it was very probable that Farrell
would have been apprehended. In addition to these facts,
Daniel Forester, the officer, proved that the prisoner
came to him on the 28th February at the Mansion-house,
stating that he did so in consequence of seeing an ad-
vertisement in a newspaper of the previous Saturday,
offering a reward for the apprehension of Farrell. Upon
being cross-examined, however, Forester said that until
the day referred to, namely, the 26th of February, there
had been no public instruction given that any forgeries
had been committed by Farrell, and that the prisoner
told him that he was induced to come forward and
state what he knew about Farrell in consequence of that
advertisement, and that he was anxious to give him all
the information he was possessed of upon the subject.
The officer likewise admitted that the prisoner told him
all the places he had been to with Farrell, and said that
he had left him at an inn near the Stoat's-nest station,
on the Brighton Railway, on the Saturday night before,
and that it was very probable he was still there • and
upon his going to the place, he found the story of the
prisoner was true, but he ascertained that Farrell had
left, and he traced him to Merstham, when he lost scent
of him, but obtained possession of a bag which con-
tained more than a hundred sovereigns, which he had
left behind him.
Mr. Ballantine, in the course.of a brief and forcible
address on behalf the prisoner, contended that there
was not a tittle of evidence in support of the charge of
harbouring and assisting Farrell, the principle felon,
which was the only charge the jury were called upon to
consider. He said there was an utter absence of proof
that the prisoner knew anything about any forgeries
having been committed, and as to his having been about
the country with Farrell, he put it to the jury whether,
considering the terms of intimacy on which they were,
he might not have been induced to do so by a hundred
different representations of the most innocent character.
He also particularly called the attention of the jury to
the fact that the moment he did learn from the adver-
tisement that Farrell was charged with forgery he im-
mediately went to the officer Forrester, and told him all
he knew upon the subject, and he said he could not help
expressing an opinion that it was hardly fair for a
powerful corporation like the Bank of England, in con-
ducting a prosecution against a person of humble cir-
cumstances like the prisoner, not to have instructed their
counsel to state the fact to the jury, but leave it to be
elicited by cross examination.
The Chief Baron, in summing up, said that, from his
own experience and his knowledge of what was passing
around him, he was satisfied that the Bank of England
regarded all matters of this description in a liberal, en-
lightened, and humane manner, and that they would not
agreedr dual under
fe cahrnaregde.
laon i
r an moment think of practising any unfairness to wards
counsel At the sa es
tah
tee qmueint et
made lay the prison rto the thamt same time
officer ought to have been
proved on the part
:f the prosecution.
Mr. Clarkson here interposed,
state-
ment was not on his briaealVivd said that the statei
it, lip Taos howeTers informed, that
ias cti,uwiase ignorant
the
Q to t

officer under circumstances likely to be prejudicial to the
prisoner, and on that account alone was not given in
evidence.

The Chief Baron said he did not see any excuse for
not offering the evidence. They had been engaged all
day in examining a multitude of witnesses proving cir-
cumstances with the greatest possible minuteness, the
whole of, which were admitted by the mouth of the pri-
soner himself, and he was afraid the statement had been
kept back by a desire so strongly entertained by detec-
tive bfficers to earn, a character for zeal, activity, and
success, ,which in reality they did not deserve.
'The=jury returned a verdict.of not guilty.