The Sun.
London, England, 1841-10-29 00:00:00

EVENING SUN.
a Fartial defence of the Poor-law administration. They,
however, quoted the --"ert in a partial ma.Ttier,
and produced the impr .ssion that Mr. Nais4V
and Dr. Bowling e: vgger .ted the distress at Bo)-
ton. The loathsome s.. _lents we have copied, anal.
Mr. Mott's unoccupied houses, teach a very different
lesson. The scenes described by the evidence of Nancy
Beswick and Betty Brown are such, till we react their po-
sitive testimony, as we supposed were never to be seen in
.Christian England. We hope that evidence, loathsome
though it be, will be read, and that the rich and the
noble, and particularly the ladies and clergy of England,
will feel 'it their duty to remedy the evils brought to
light. If the ladies of Enziancl be not lost to the feel-
ings of womanhood, they will never allow their husbands
fathers, ,and brothers to have any rest till those
laws be abolished, which degrade the condition
of the people of England to the level of that of the Hot-
tentots. Mr. Naisby's pamph2et concludesbf the following
reference to the present condition of the people at Bolton :
It may be said that these cases having occurred some
time ago, that distress is not so great in. Bolton at pre..
sent, pn that subject I Leg to refer to a report which
blished and circulated in Bolton, within the
bla7t brentlfias:s. by the Committee of the Society for the
Protection of tht:• Poor of. which the Rev. J. Slade,
Vicar of this parish, is the President, and the Rev. J. S
Birley, Vice-. President, in which the following important
information appears:—` Number of indiriduals consti-
tutinz the families of appli:-ants. 2,65 G ; average income
per week; is. 2:1-d.; average income per week- of parties
reliqved, 10411.' "
We leave these matters to make their own impression
on the minds of the people.

THE EXcHEQUER BILLS FRAUD.
liy the solemn decision of the JUDGES in the case of
Rex v. Robert Asia?, which we extract to-day from Rus-
sell-and Ryan's Croton Cases Reserved, it was held that
Exchequer Bills issued as valid bills by the authority, of
Government, though signed. with the name of the'auditor
of the Exchequer, by a person not legally authorised to
sign them, and therefore forgeries, cortaitute EFFECTS in
the hands of bona fide purchasers, and that the innocent
holders have a' claim on the justice of the Government for
their payment.
As to the other point raieed before the JUDGES in that
case, it has no beatify, upon the law of the case now
undergoing inquisitorial investigation at the Treasury.
We need hardly add, that neither the forgery of Exche-
quer Bills, nor the embezzlement of securities or other
effects from the Bank of England, is a crime MIN' punish-
able with death. Tile last of those sanguinary statutes
was repealed by the Bill of Mr. Fitzroy Kelly last year.
REX V. none= ASLETT.
The prisoner was tried and convicted before _Mr. Jus-
tice Le Blanc, at the Old Bailey September Sessions, in
the year 1803, for-embezzling effects belonging to die Go-
vernor and Company of the Bank of England, he being
an officer and servant of the Bank, and, as such,' en-
trested with the effects.
The first count
,of the indictment stated that Robert
Aslett was an officer and servant of the Bank of
England, and, as such officer and servant, was en-
trusted by the• said Governor and Company with,cer-
tain effects belonging to the said Governor and Com-
patty, that is to say, a certain paper partly printed and
partly written, purporting to be a bill commonly called
an Exchequer Bill, the tenor of which said paper,
partly printed and partly written, is. as follows, that is
to bay (setting forth a bill for 500/., No. 835), which
said pare was, then and there, belonging to the said
Governor and Company, and of the value of 5001., and.
which said ,sum of 5001. in the said paper mentioned.
was then and there unpaid and unsatisfied to the said
Governor and ;%ompany, the holders thereof (the indict-
ment then set for eh two other bills in like manner, No. •
2,694 and No. 1,01, each 'for 1,0001. ;) and that the
said Robert Aslett, so then and there, being such officer
and serf of the said Governor and Company, and so en-
trusted as aforesaid with 'lle said effects so as aforesaid
belonging to the said Gov.ernor and Company, did then
and there, with force and :.'er=rs, feloniously secrete, em-
bezzle, and run away with th.e.,said effects so as aforesaid
belonging to the said Governor' .and Company, and of the
value of 2,5001., against the st, etnte, and against the
peace, &c.
There were other counts in the h. Idielment, some like
the first count above set forth; only ne a stating the paper
to be of any value, and others not state. 7g any value, but
stating that the Governorand Compan)' Jtad, on the credit
and security of the paper. partly prie-eted and
partly
written, advanced a large runt of money'. which money
was unpaid and unsatisfied to the Goverx.`or and Com-
pany, the holders thereof'.
There were also another set of counts, call. 'w.;* the bills
securities instead of effects.
It was admitted on the part of the proseet
et: on that
those hills were not valid and legal Ex cheqe 'e. r Bills,
having been signed with the name of Lord GrA
the auditor of the Exchequer. by a person not 1,4, 7,311 Y
authorised to sign them for bhp. But that they had
been issued as good and valid bills, and the Gorer. nor
and Company of the Bank had bought them and paid .
for
them as such.
Judgment was respited that the opinion of the Jurcn.3
might be taken, whether these bills or papers were effitcts
or securities within the Act of Parliament, 15 Geo. 11.,
c. 13, s. 12.
On the 16th of February, 1804, this case was arguecr
by Erskine for the prisoner, and Giles for the Crown.
Two points were made ; first, that. the 39 Geo. 111.,
c. 85, had virtually repealed the 15 Geo. 11., c. 13, s. 12,
as to the punishment of death inflicted on the offence in
the latter Act. Secondly, as these were admitted not to
be valid Exchequer Bills, they were not effects within
the 15 Geo. IL, c. 13.
The JUDGES wer? unanimoNs that the 39 Geo. 111.,
c. 85, had not repealed the 15 Geo. 11., c. 13, and a
majority of the JUDGES held that these bill.? and papers
were EFFECTS within the 15 Geo. 11., for flit'?" Were is-
sued under the authority of Government as valid Bills,
and the holder had a claim on thejustice of the Government
payment.

j

k