The Sun.
London, England, 1841-01-07 00:00:00

CENTR, IL CRIMINAL COURT.

(OLD COURT.)
(Before Mr. Baron ROLFE and Mr. Justice COLEIUDOIE.)
FORGERY t'PJN THE BANK OF ENGLAND.—James
Fieligate Porter, aged 22, was indicted for feloniously
forging and uttering a warrant or order for 3801. with
intent to defraud the Govenor and Company of the
Bank of England.
In another count the intent was laid to be to defraud
Messrs. Sandys and Co.
Sir Frederick Pollock, Mr. Adolphus, and Mr. Bullock,
appeared for the Bank of England. Mr. Clarkson de-
tended the prisoner.
Sir Frederick Pollock having brieflly addressed the
jun , called the following witnesses :
.Mr. Robert Curtis stated that he was a clerk in the
Private Clearing Office of the Bank cf England, and that
Messrs. Sandys and Co. had an account at that establish-
ment. On the 11th December the prisoner came to the
Bank and presented a check, apparently signed by that
firm, for the sum of 3801. ; and the prisoner wished to have
2001. in gold, and the remainder in small notes. Some
suspicion was felt respecting the signature, and witness
communicated with Mr. Palmer, another gentleman on the
establishment, and a messenger was sent to Messrs. Sandys
and Co., and the prisoner was desired to wait for a short
time; and in consequence of what was ascertained, he was
given into custody. The witness then produced the check
that was brought to the Bank by the prisoner.
Mr. James Palmer proved that he questioned the pri.
soner respecting the check, and he told him that he had
got it from a person of the name of Brett, and that he had
met him in the street, and he was to take the money to him
to a public-house in St. George's-fields.
William Brand, one of the City Marshals, proved that
he took the prisoner into custody, and he asked him where
he got the forged check from. Ile replied that he had re-
ceived the check from a young man named Brett, who
lived in the Westminster-road, and that he was to take

the money to him at a public-house in the neighbourhood
of that place. He was about to search the prisoner, when
he said that Brett had given him a book to put the check
in for the purpose of keeping it clean, and he produced
the book. On searching the prisoner he found a canvass
bag which, he said, was to put the money in.
Some other evidence was adduced, when it appeared

that Brett a as formerly a clerk to Messrs. Sandys and Co.
and that he had absconded from their employ. It also
appeared that the minute the prisoner was taken into
custody, he begged that the officers would go with him to
secure Brett.

Mr. Justice COLERIDGE upon this intimated his opinion
that the Jury, under such circumstances, would not convict
the prisoner of wilfully uttering the check, knowing it to
be forged. The prisoner it appeared all along told thc'same
story, and it was very probable that he had been deceived
by the young man Brett.
The Jury accordingly returned a verdict of Not guilty.
William Johnson, 23, was indicted for forgery and
uttering an order for the payment of 101 103., with intent
to defraud Messrs. Stone, Martin, and Co., the bankers.
. .

Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Doane conducted the prosecution.
It appeared from the evidence that the prisoner had for-
merly been in the service of Captain Charitie, of the East
India Company's service, but had left his employ some
time prior to the 18th of December. On that day the pr
soner went to one of the Captain's tradesmen and wished
to pay for a hat he had purchased, and tendered a check,
apparently signed by Captain Charitie, for ten guineas.
The tradesman to whom he applied happened not to have
sufficient change, and the prisoner left the shop. The
next day the prisoner went to the prosecutors', where
the Captain kept an account, and told the- cashier
that he had been sent with a check that had been pre-
sented at his master's by a servant of Captain Charitie's,
and that he wished to know whether it was a genuine one,
and was sent for that purpose. Some suspicion was
created, and the prisoner was given into custody, and when
the officer was taking him to the Compter, he tore up a
piece of paper, which turned out to be a fac simile of the
forged cheek.
T..e prisoner's former master gave him a good character
during the period he was in his service.
Verdict—Guilty. Sentence—Ten years' transportation.
John Castles, aged 21, was indicted for stealing a 101.
Bank of England note from a letter, that had ceme into
his possession as servant to a post-master.
The prisoner pleaded guilty to the charge.
Judgment deferred.
Thomas Rosser, 33, and David Smith, 29, were in-
dicted for assaulting and robbing William Dowst upon
the Queen's highway, and taking from his person a watch,
and 30s. in money, his property.
Mr. Clarkson conducted the prosecution. .

This case occupied the Couh for some considerable
time ; but, as the facts have been given very recently, it
will be unnecessary to report them upon the present oc-
casion. They were found guilty, and sentenced to be
transported for life.
(Before Mr. Sergeant ARABIN.)
James Dutton, aged 3g, was placed at the bar, and in-
dicted for feloniously sending a certain letter to George
Lane Blount, Esq., charging him with having committed
a certain offence, with intent thereby to extort money

from him.
The prisoner pleaded Guilty to the charge.
Mr. Sergeant ARABIN having looked over the deposi-
tions, addressed the prisoner, and told him that he had
pleaded guilty to a charge of.the most serious character, and
it was an offence which at one time would have subjected

him to czpital punishment, and that punishment would, in
all probability, have been carried into effect. The sentence
of the Court, under all the circumstances was, that he be
transported beyond the seas for the term of seven years.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

MANSION-HOUSE.

Three young men, of respectable appearance, named
Gibson, Brown, and Tizza'd, were summoned before
Alderman Pirie by the London and Blackwall Railway
Company, upon the 3d and 4th of Victoria, commonly
called Lord Seymour's Act, cap. 97, section 16, by which
it is enacted. " That if any person wilfully obstruct or im-
pede any officer or agent of a Railway Company in the
execution of his duty, or if any person shall trespass on any
railway, and refuse, upon being required, to quit it, he
may be detained until he shall be brought before a Justice,
and fined any sum not exceeding 51., or in default of pay-
ment of the penalty, be imprisoned for any period not ex-
ceeding two calendar months." The prisoners were also
charged with having assaulted one of the officers on duty.
The Solicitor to the London and Blackwall Railway
Company attended to prosecute, and Mr. Hill appeared as
solicitor to the prisoners.
The Solicitor to the Company having mentioned that
the public safety was deeply concerned in the preven-
tion of all obstructions, briefly stated the facts as they
were detailed subsequently in evidence. He declared
that, as impediments had frequently occurred, the Com-
pany was determined to prosecute every violation of so
salutary an enactment.
Rutherford, a porter of the Railway Company, stated
that, on the evening of the 24th of December, it was his
duty to let passengers in and out of the first and second
classes of carriages. Upon the arrival of the train at the
Minories he let out Tizzard, who was in the second-class
carriage, first; he then let out Brown and Gibson, who
were in the first-class carriage, and pointed out to them
all the way from the station. Tizzard said that he wanted
to see the ground, and took no notice of his request that
they would go on. Gibson then said to witness, "If you
insult my friend, I'll smash your face," and held up his
fists accordingly. The guard then came up, and said that
Gibson must not strike witness; upon which Gibson said,
" I will strike you too." It was necessary, as the train
sets off every quarter of an hour, to have the station
cleared for the passengers who were to go down, and the
defendants would not go until they were forced away.
They made great resistance, so that it took ten or a dozen
men to put them down. Gibson was most particularly,
offensive, and struck the poticeman employed on the sta-
tion. The three defendants were drunk.
The witness gave his evidence in such a manner as led
all who heard it to believe that his tone and manner in a
place where he might venture to assume authority must
have been intolerable. _ _

The Ticket Collector to the Company stated that he
observed the three defendants quarrelling with the first wit-
ness and the policemen, and obstructing the ingress and
egress of the passengers. The policeman was endeavour-
ing to prevail upon the defendants to go away, and was
struck by Gibson, who was the most violent of all. Wit-
ness, when be saw the policeman struck, said that the de-
fendant must be takenito the station-house.
Alderman PIRIE—In what condition were they, intoxi-
cated or sober ? Witness—They were all drunk.
Dempsey, a policeman acting for the Company stated
that lie was called to turn the defendants off the platform.
He requested them to go, and Brown said, " they would
see him d—d first." The check-taker told witness to do
his duty, and turn them off the platform, or the passen-
gers who were about to go to Blackwall could not be
known. Witness then proceeded to move them off, and
when they got into the yard, Gibson, who was exceed-
ingly violent, struck him. They threw themselves on the
ground, and resisted most violently, and Gibson's coat
was torn in the struggle. The foreman called out to wit-
ness to take the men to the station house, and he did so
with the assistance of seven or eight others.
Mr. Hill said that one of his clients wanted to go back
to the carriage in which he arrived for his handkerchief
and gloves, and if he had been in common courtesy per-
mitted, not one word would have been tittered ; but the
request was not only refused, but refused in terms of in-
sufferable insolence. The fact was that Mr. Gibson,
when very reasonably expressing his indignation, was most
roughly handled and dragged to the station-house, and his
two friends, after subsequently calling at that place for
the purpose of administering to his wants, were detained in
order that they might appear as defendants instead of wit-
nesses.

The statement of the defendants was to the following
effect :—Upon leaving the carriages, Mr. Brown having
dropped his glove, stooped down to look for it, whereupon
the porter said, D—n you, Sir, walk one way or the
other." Not relishing such an address, Mr. Brown said
that he should take the number of the person who used such
language, and complain to the Company. At that mo-
ment another of the persons upon the railroad said, ‘' Oh,
d—n them, they are only Custom-house officers ;" and
the persons who had given evidence immediately proceedei
to act with great. violence, and dragged Mt. Gibson to the
station-house, where they put handcuffs upon him, and the
two other defendants having called to bail him, were de-
tained. They complained that the po►ice sergeant at the
station-house not only exercised the most tyrannical au-
thority there, but refused to let them have a messeuger to
inform their families of their situation. As for the charge
of having been drunk, they denied that they had drank
any thing hot porter or ale, which they took in modest
quantities. Two of them were Custom-house officers,
and had been doing duty on board the Rockers, near
Gravesenel.

Alderman PIRIE—The witnesses have sworn that you
were all drunk, and I have no reason to doubt that you
caused an obstruction. Now the danger arising to the
public from confusion and impediments in such a place is
extreme. I can easily perceive that the porter acted upon
this occasion with a spirit which shows that he is not a fit
person for the situation which he holds. Civility is a ►ery

cheap commodity, and it is evident that he has it riot. I
fine Mr.. Gibson; who acted most violently, twentj shillings,
and each of the other defendants ten shillings.
The defendants immediately paid the fines andileparted.
THE SHIP DRTAD.-It is but justice to James
Stott, who was apprehended on suspicion of having been
implicated in the frauds upon the Insurance Companies;
together with Patrick Maxwell Stewart Wallace, and
Michael Shaw Stewart Wallace, is now considered, after a
searching investigation, which has taken place, to have been
wholly ignorant of the designs attributed to these two pri-
soners with respect to the ship Dryad. Mr. Stott is to be
examined as a witness on the trial. The suspicions against
him were caused by the anxiety which be exhibited to do
business as broker on the occasion.