The Sun.
London, England, 1831-01-08 00:00:00

OLD BAILEY SESSIONS.-(THIS DAY.)

OLD COURT.

Richard Curtis, better known as Dick Curtis, flu
celebrated pugilist, surrendered this morning to plead to n
indictment preferred against him. The case had been be-
fore the Court last Sessions, when, owing to some infor

mality, Curtis was acquitted, but another indictment was
ardered to be preferred against him. The charge against
the defendant was one of robbery, commived on :moths'
of the same honourable profession, called " Jack the. Pain-
ter." Curtis having pleaded Not Gnilty, he was dis-
charged on his former securities being renewed for his ap-
pearance at a future day for trial.
Frederick Smith, aged 31• years, was capitally indicted
for uttering a forged bill of exchange for 381. lie., nits
intent to defraud Edward West ; and a second indictment
charged the prisoner with uttering in the city of London
a forged bill of exchange for 281. 14e., with intent to de-
fraud Thomas Carman.
Mr. CLARKSON stated the case for the prosecution.
Edward West, partner of Lucy Strange, residing is
Hatton-garden, stated that the prisoner had been in
the habit of dealing with them. About two or three
days previous to the day named in the indictment
he called on them, and said he wanted some ivory.
He purchased some to the amount of 10/. 17e. Ile told
me he expected to receive a bill front Messrs. Walton and
Son, when he would call and pay for what he had pur-
cha'd. He came on the 15th of May with a bill to pay
for the ivory. I gave him 22/. 13s. in cash, in change,
deducting at the same time a balance due to us on a
former account, and the price of the ivory. I endorsed
the bill io my banker's, when it was due it was returned.
Cross-examined by Mr. C. Pun-Lies—Mrs. Strange
is a widow. The prisoner did not appear at all confused
when he tendered the bill. I have known him a long
time, and have dealt with him many times.
William Walton—l am of the firm of Walton and Son,

toy •merchants, in llisbepsgate-stieet. The bill now pro-
duced is not the acceptance of any one of our firm. Thy
prisoner has done no business with us for three years prior
to the date of this bill. The prisoner has had acceptances
signed ‘. Walton and Son," but since that time the ❑ame
of the firm is changed, it being now John, Henry, and
William Walton.

William Bingham apprehended the prisoner on the 6th
of December at a coffee-shop in Duke's-court, Bow-
street. When I took him into custody on account of
Mr. Carman, he seemed much alarmed. I searched his
lodgings, where I found thirty-six duplicates.
The bills were here read to the Court by the Clerk.

Mr. West examined by Mr. C. Pttimars—Does not
know what stamp is enough for an acceptance of 381.
(The Learned Counsel here called for the bill, and com-
paring it with the Stamp Act it appeared to he drawn on
a wrong stamp.)
This closed the case for the prosecution.
The prisoner put in a written defence, stating that he
had embarked considerable property in mercantile pursuits,
with a person of the name of Anderson, whose dupe he
(tke prisoner) had been. He left his case to the merciful
consideration of the Court and Jury, he hoped they would
consider he had a wife and three young children, and hr
trusted he might be restored to them.
Mr. C. Piiirmvs called the names of several witnesses
to character, but it appeared they were mistaken as to the
time the prisoner was to take his trial; two respectable
gentlemen however appeared, who gave him an excellent
character.
Mr. Justice GAZELEE summed up, and informed the
Jury that the bill being drawn on a wrong stamp would
make no difference to their verdict, as, if a person forged
the name of another on a stamp smaller than was re-
quired by Act of Parliament, or even on blank paper, yet
the crime in the eye of the law was the same. The
Learned Judge then went through the evidence very mi-
nutely, and
The Jury returned a verdict of Guilty of uttering know-
ing it to be forged.
The prisoner, who is a man of very respectable appear-
ance, was so affected at the announcement of the verdict,
that he was obliged to be supported by the officers of the
Court when he left the deck.

The Jury and prosecutor strongly recommended the
prisoner to mercy on account of his wife and family.
Mr. ALLEY rose on behalf of Mr. St. John Long, and
informed the Court that that gentleman had apprised the
parties for the prosecution, through his attorney, that it
was his intention to surrender on Monday, if they would
promise his trial should take place on that day, the only
answer he had received was, that Mr. St. John Long was
not in custody, he therefore wished to acquaint the Court
that Mr. St. John Long would not surrender this sessions.