The Sun.
London, England, 1834-01-04 00:00:00

CITY OF LONDON CORPORATION
INQUIRY.-(THIS DAY.)

The Commissioners resumed their adjourned investigations
this morning, at a quarter past eleven o'clock.

Sir F. PALGRAVE in the Chair.

Mr. Woodthorpe, the town-clerk, continued his evidence
relative to the constitution of the Court of Lord Mayor and
Aldermen. There are four officers, the Recorder, the Cham.
berlain, Common Clerk, and Common Sergeant. But of recent
date other officers are allowed to take their seat at the table
when occasion required, namely, the Judges of the Sheriffs'
Court, the Comptroller, Remembrancer, and Solicitor. Other
officers were allowed to be in Court, but below the bar,
the Sheriffs, Common Pleaders, and the Secondaries ;
the two latter, however, rarely attend unless they have actual
business before the Court. Their admission is by sufferance.
The Sherif% have a duty to perform at every Court, namely,
to lay before the Court a report of the state of the gaols, signed
by the keepers and surgeons. The attendants on the Court
are the sword-bearer, the mace-bearer, and the common-crier
stationed at the outside of the door. No summons is issued
without the Lord Mayors order. There are four yeomen of
the water-side whose duty it is to summon the members of the
Court, two of whom are in waiting every alternate
week. When there is any special business, particularly
appeals and elections, it is always usual to give notice of the
summons. Since 1815 it has been customary to make out at
the beginning of every mayoralty a sort of calendar of court
days, in the nature of an almanack, which had been found very
convenient. The Lord Mayor, however, had the sole power of
fixing the days. This was an invention of Mr. Woodthorpe,
founded on the average of business which had been approved of
by every Lord Mayor, as it enabled him to make his arrange-
ments. There were from 15 to 20 fixed court days. Sometimes
the courts were not held on the calendar days, as when other
public business interferes, and in that case the Lord Mayor gives
public intimation that the court has been postponed. Twenty-five
is the full number to make a Court. It is not the practice to
count out, from want of a quorum; after being once consti-
tuted, business was proceeded with till an objection was taken.
If one member out of twenty.five takes an objection, and con-
tumaciously persists, and leaves the room, the Court is broken
up. But in that case he would be liable to penalties for his
absence. They never proceed to business till there are twelve
in the room, besides the Lord Mayor. One Alderman leaving
is in the nature of a protest; and any other member taking
notice of his departure, would break up the Court. Once appear-
ing in the Court, it is considered that the presence of the whole
number is essential to the business of the meeting. It is not
usual, however, to take such objections, although instances
have occurred. The officers at the table have no vote. He
did not know any instance of a Court being held by adjourn-
ment without a fresh summons. It was the duty of every Al-
derman to attend the Court, and the principle of its unity de-
pends on immemorial usage. The Lord Mayor may summon
a Court of Aldermen at a moment's notice, and in some in-
stances he is obliged to do it, particularly on occasion of the
death of the King. It is not necessary that the summons
should be written ; a court may be called by a verbal message
delivered by one of the Lord Mayor's household officers.
Since recourse has been had to the calendar, it is not usual
that there is any deficiency of aldermen to make up a quorum.
Tuesday and Friday are the ordinary Court days, but the Lord
Mayor may call a meeting any day, even on Sunday, as was
the case on the demise of his late Majesty, and also about
a fortnight ago, when the disturbances took place in Portsoken
ward. The object was to guard against a breach of the
peace. The Court was summoned by verbal message In
an hour's interval after the Calthorpe-street affair. The Court
of Aldermen is a Court of appeal as well as of original juris-
diction. Every redemptioner or claimer for freedom by pur-
chase is a petitioner. Every such petition must be presented
by an Alderman. Notices are usually sent to petitioners, but
it is a matter of favour. Besides petitions for the freedom of
the city, there are also petitions for the admission and discharge
of brokers, for the admission of attorneys to practice in the
Lord Mayor's Court, and petitions of appeal.
Mr. Woodthorpe was proceeding with his evidence when our
reporter left.

OLD BAILEY SESSIONS-(THIS DAY.)

OLD COURT.

Wm. Collier was indicted for feloniously forging a certain
transfer of the sum of 2,044/. Is. 3d. Three per Cent. annu-
ities, with intent to defraud the Governor and Company of the
Bank of England. In a second count the prisoner was charged
with feloniously uttering a certain forged transfer, and, in other
counts, the charge was varied as to the intent to defraud, lay-
ing the property in the amount of stock to be in Richard Squire
and others.

The prisoner, a person of middle age and gentlemanly ex-
terior, who was described in the calendar as a surgeon by pro-
fession, pleaded Not Guilty.
Sir JAMES SCARLETT (With whom were Mr. ADOLPHUS
and Mr. BULLOCK) stated the case to the Jury on behalf of
the prosecution, which was instituted by the Governor and
Company of the Bank of England. The Learned Gentleman
reminded the Jury that the Law in respect to forgery had been
recently altered, and certain offences were now exempted from
capital punishment. The offence with which the prisoner stood
charged came within the exemption though the forgery of a
warrant of attorney for such a transfer as had been effected in
the present case was still a capital crime and punishable with
death.

Mr. Richard Squire examined by Mr. ADOLPHUS—I reside at
Kings Langley, in Hertfordshire. I hold in my hand the pro-
bate of the will of Mrs. Mary Martin, of Beakensfield, under
which I am trustee of certain money, 1,6001., left by her to her
niece, the wife of the prisoner. This money was invested in
the Funds id' the Three per Cent. Reduced Annuities, in
the names of the prisoner and myself as trustees, and I now
produce the original receipt of the purchase, it being 2,0441.35. Id.
The prisoner was entitled, during his life and that of his
wife to receive the dividends upon that sum. The brokers
who acted in the purchase were Messrs. George and Henry
Wheeler. I never assisted in any manner, nor consented to
the transfer at any time of the stock.
Mr. Francis Henderson, a clerk in the Three per Cent.
Reduced Office, at the Bank of England, produced the transfer
book in which the transfer in question was entered.
Mr. Richard Squire was shown the book, and proved that
the signature, William Collier, was in the handwriting of the
prisoner, but the signature, " Richard Squire," was not in
witness's writing, The prisoner was well acquainted with
the witness's person, and could not mistake another person for
the witness,

Cross-examined by Mr. CLARKSON (who with another gen-
tleman defended the prisoner)—Know the prisoner's son,
whose name I believe is William Collier. I had under the
advice of Counsel a suit in Chancery, with the prisoner in con-
sequence of his seeking for the transfer to him of certain pro-
perty devised to his wife under the will of Mrs. Martin, and
that trasfer was directed by the Court of Chancery. Witness
has sustained no loss, nor has any demand been made upon
him by the prisoner's wife since the transfer with which the
prisoner stands charged.
Sir JAMES ScARLETT then put in the will of the late Mrs.
Mary Martin, which was read by the Clerk of the Arraigns,
and from it it appeared that the sum of 1,6004 was devised to
trustees, in trust for her niece, the wife of the prisoner, with
directions that if she died intestate the property should fall
into the residuary estate. But a power to bequeath
the same was given to the devisee. The will also appointed
the prisoner and Mr. Squire trustees and executors, who were
exempted from being answerable for the defaults of each other
respectively,.

Mr. Squirerecalled and examined by Mr. CLARKSON—The
sum of 1001. bequeathed to the prisoner's son, was paid to him
when he came of age in July, 1632, together with the accu-
mulated interest, making together the sum of 1401.

Mr. John Rumsey examined by Mr. BULLOCK—I am a soli-
citor, residing at High Wycombe, in the county of Bucking-
ham, and know the prisoner, who, in 1826, communicated
with me on the subject of a loan of two hundred pounds,
which I obtained for him from Mr. John Law. The prisoner
executed as a security the deed which I now produce, to which
I was an attesting witness. It is executed by the prisoner,
William Collier, Sarah Collier his wife, and John Law.
The deed, dated August 2, 1826, was then put in and read.
It recited the devise to the prisoner's wife, contained in the
will of the late Mrs. Mary Martin, of the 1,6001. invested in
the stock, and assign -ill the dividends of the stock to Mr.
John Law as a security for the repayment of the loan of 2001.
Examination resumed—The money advanced has not been
repaid. Mr. Law is now dead, but I Produce the probate of
his will. The prisoner formerly lived at Stoke Church, in
Oxfordshire, but I do not know wben he left it.

Cross-examined by Mr. TAYLOR—The interest upon the
loans has not been paid. The prisoner has several young
children.

Mr. Bunter examined by Sir JAMES ScARLErr—I am clerk
to Mr. Durant, stock-broker, and know the prisoner at the bar.
I first saw him in Oct., 183.2,when he said he wanted to purchase
140/. 3 per cent. consols, which purchase I made. He paid me the
money, and I gave him a stock receipt. The letter produced is in
the prisoner's handwriting, and was sent to our office. It is
addressed to Mr. Durant, and requests him to sell 1401., and
stated Mr. Squire would attend to make a transfer to the pri-
soner's son, William Collier. I prepared the usual transfer
ticket for the Bank of England, and the prisoner called on the
10th January last, two days after the date of the letter. The
prisoner was attended by another person, and they were accom-
panied to the Bank of England to make the transfer by another
clerk.

William Blackburn examined by Sir JAMES ScAxtrrr—l
am clerk to Mr. Durant, and attended the prisoner and another
person to make the transfer at the Bank of England. I knew
the prisoner, but not the other person. Mr. Richard Squire,
nnw in Court, is not that person. I saw the prisoner execute
the transfer, and the other person also, in the name of Richard
Squire.
' ' '

- .
The entry of the transfer was then read. It purported to be
a transfer of 2,044/. 3s. Id., Three per Cents., by William Col-
lier and Richard Squire, to William Collier, junior.
Examination resumed—l supposed the other person to be
Mr. Squire, because the prisoner brought him. He passed
as Mr. Squire. In the month of October following, the
prisoner came again to Mr. Durant's office, to effect the sale
of the stock 1201., and the documents produced are the pri-
soner's written instructions to prepare a power of attorney.
The instructions I left, according to the usual practice, at the
Bank of England, and procured the power of attorney, as re-
quired, and which was subsequently sent in a letter by the pri.
soner, executed by himself, and purporting to be executed also
by his son. The transfer was made accordingly, and the