The Sun.
London, England, 1812-01-20 00:00:00

stiips desired it, with diTroving the prisoner's pre-
tence about his tvegociating with Mr. Trotter, the
agent of Megs's. Coutts, and the 4xctie;per
said to be locked up in his drawer.; there bentg,.in
fact, no such agent, nor a shadow of any:slit:in
. transaction in existtrice.

•M. Chatters, a wine-merchant and stock-dealer,
whp purchased the 22,0001. stock of Sir'
Plo-
mer, through the agency of M. Walsh, proved that
he-.,ad har2,4,iiid with Mr. Walsh for the purchase
of Sir T. P.rs• 22,0001. stock, and that he had 'left.
the day. open, for -64 l'-.Plomer's own •conyeni-
price io• attend ~for the transfer, and that he was
dis.ppointed in conequence of- the prisoner's not
coming for the purpose on the day be appointed,
which the prisoner soon afterwards attributed to Sir
T. P.'a no being able to attend.
Mr: Joseph Fearn, goldsinith, of Cornhill, prov-
ed, 1 hat the prisoner spoke to him on the of Be-
(ember, on the suhjeki of' purchasing a quaniity of
Portugal pieces, which he would want the-next day.
He called again on 4,h, and:said he should want
them on the 51h, to the amouut of 5001. He ac-
cordingly procured them, but the prisoner diminish-
ed his order to 3001. and paid 'for them'in a 'check,
which proved to be the identical check paid by-Mr.
Clarke, the ilisoner's brother-in-law, to the pris-
soner, in-change of a 100017 note.•

Mr. 11111e3 Webb, hosier, in Threadneedle-street,
proved that the prisoner came to his door in the
.FL!clinekstagt., on the morning of the sth of 'De-
c; tuber, brought with him a small travelling port-
manteau, and, a travelling peat coat, and bought of
Ipth a dozen pairs. of boot-stockings, and four night-
caps, which the witnes, sent- with the portmanteau
and great_ coat, to she prisoner's otlice, in Angel-
cburt.

Mr. Jenkins, the Solicitor of Sir T. P. Stated,-thFt
inconsequence of the direclion of Sir T. P. he set
oik tOr Plymouth, where he arrived on the morning
of the gth December, and -there found Mr. Walsh
at an Ino; in a private room, in company with three
other Gentlemen. He called -him put, and had an.
inteeVi,,, with hiM in presence of a vvaiieri,:Jold
the prisoner he supposed be must be aware of';:the-
Datore of his,errand; that he had 'defrauded the
Solicitor-General to a very considerable-arn.Ourit,.x3d•
that he now came to demand restitution of such-
property as he had with him., Ibe prisoner an-
swered he-- had,nothing but foreign property with
biin. Witness replied, he knew what property
be ha.,;- .and; after some hesilation,.be surrendered
the. American debentures before mentioned, and
the bag of- doubloons He confessed to witness
bat he- was going to Lisbon, and thence, as oppor-
unity should offer, to America. He then gave
him Into the custody of- Adkins, the Bow-street
Officer, and they brought him to London.
The case on be!,alt of the prosecution being
eosed,'the Lottp.,C4.lEF BARON applied to the pri-
soner- for,his defence; he bowed, arid

Mc. SCALLETT 105 e to address lo -the Court the
legal objelilons which occurred to him, •agdinst the
case on behalf of the prosecution.
Mr. GARROW interposed, that if his' Learned
}a lend had my points which he thought fit for the
giave consideration of the Calla,- he had no doubt
they were so, and begged they might be saved for
the opinion of all the Judges, and that he,'(3lr.`
Garrow) might not be put to answer them withAit"
}}►eparat;oq.

It wai therefore agreed, that Mr. Scarlet( should
shortly state the points upon which he meant to

_Mr. SCARLETT said, it could not be understood
that he entertained any other-feeling of the otfence
with which the prisoner stood charged ii a moral
po.nt.of view, than that which- muss impress every
weil-rrgulated mind; and indeed it-appeared from
the letters of the prisoner, that he was 'himself
deeply impressed with the same dews of his
Offence, for which he was Sincerely coniaite, :and
for which he thought the meattal 'pUnishitent t-taider
which he now laboured was only a jraStaaetribution.
But though the prisoner's offence could :not. be sm..-
tally palliated, yet the question for a-humane Cotirt
of ..LIStiCC was, whether. his conduct was such as to
support the felonious charge upon the record. The
ind,encient divided itself into two partseone accus-
ing the prisoner of stealing the Bank-notes, and the
other of the cheqtre ; the latter branch of the
charge being more mainly relied upon, as it would
appeer from the greater number of counts being ad-
dressed towards it. Upon this. charge • nothing
Could be made out ; for it the prisoner was indiated
for stealing the cheque within the statute, part of
its produce was properly applied to the prosecutorfs
use, and it wasaherefore impossible to say- that:the
`piisoner had a felonious intention in taking the
cheque. The Learned. Counsel- then took another
objettieo, under- the statute 2 Geo. IL c. 25 . that
the` security ititended to be produced could not be
such as -was avaiiable to the party himselfe If it
had found its way to the hands of a third person,
and he had been robbed of it, it would come within
that statute. The cheque gave the prosecutor no
edditional credit with his banker. But the most
impottant and material question ( titer the Jury had
declared what was the previous intention of the pri-
sooer at the time of his receiving the caeque) would
be this the Learned Counsel agreed with Mr.
Garrow, that -a felonious intention was necessary at
the tahing, but differed from him, that to prove
that was sutficteat in. this case; the great question
was, when the prosecutor had patted with the
C'eeque, and the prisoner had received the notes,
bad the prosecutor parted with ,his property in the
.Baek-notes ? And was not what heexpeEted to
receive something else? Was it not a debt incur-
red by the prisoner, which-he was io satisfy by the
repayment of Exchequer. Bill, ? Tata distioetions
Were already very nice, and the line very tierily
drawn bet Ween ',civil frauds and c riminaloireirceS ;
and a conviction of felony in this case would make
that line stiff more indistinct. The Learned Coun-
sel was persuaded _the Judges would not so
decide. He had . always understood that a fe-
lony must be accompanied by some act of tres-
pass, circumvention, or• fraud, on the part -of the
prisoner, and could not be borne "out by a mere in-
tent
to misappropriate. The at must be done
anima jurandi I and there was no case where the
voluntary ad of the prosecutor constituted a felony
in the prisoner. This waxlike the case of a banker,
with whom, if a customer have made a deposit, the
banker-having done no ad to procure the deposit, no