The Sun.
London, England, 1833-11-13 00:00:00

INSOLVENT COURT, Nov. 12.

Michael Davis was opposed by Mr. Collins in
person ; he was supported by Mr. COOKE.
The insolvent had been discharged under the Act
in May, 1831, since which time he had accepted
accommodation bills for a dealer in skins, of the
name of Phillips, of Dockhead, to the amount of
901.; these acceptances had been dishonoured, and
the insolvent now applied to the Court to be relieved
from them and his other debts.
The Learned Commissioner BOWEN determined
that his present application could not be supported
without the consent of three-fourths of his creditors
to his discharge.
Edmund Smith was opposed by a Mr. George
Robson in person; he was supported by Mr. COOKE.
The insolvent had been in partnership with
another person as carriers between Hastings arid
London. Mr. George Robson had a claim against
him for 641. for hire of a van ; the inquiry was to
ascertain what had become of the horses employed
in the business, and to whom certain furniture be-
longed.
The case was ordered to stand over for certain
way-bills to be filed.

Thomas Sweet was opposed by Mr. Scales, jun.,
on the part of himself and father, Mr. Michael
Scales ; by Mr. Smith, Mr. Matthews, and Mr.
Upsal, in person. He was supported by Mr. COOKE.
The insolvent is a butcher, and his opposing cre-
ditors are salesmen and carcass-butchers, in a large
way of business. The insolvent had dealt for several
years with the Messrs. Scales, and his payments
were generally made every week or every fortnight ;
the whole amount of these dealings had amounted to
6001. The insolvent, in the course of last summer,
had been in debt to Messrs. Scales to the amount of
30/. Mr. Scales, jun., had applied to him for pay-
ment, and he had represented to that gentleman
that he was short of money, but that his brother-in-
law had died and left him 5001. The executors
made some dispute about the immediate payment
of the legacy, but that it was sure to be paid. The
testator had died worth 100,000/., and he (Sweet)
considered himself very ill-used in riot having a
larger bequest made to him. Mr. Scales, jun., who
admitted that he was not very curious as to the
amount of the wealth attributed to the deceased,
was induced upon this representation, and also upon
the good character which he considered to belong
to the insolvent, whose word he believed, to wait
for the payment of his demand, and also to permit
the insolvent to run in his debt 28/. further, making
the total of his present demand .58/. It appeared
that the account of the legacy was devoid of truth,
and that the insolvent was not entitled to any pro-
perty whatever.
Mr. Upsal, a salesman, had trusted the insolvent
to the amount of 491. 18s. a short time before he
went to prison. The insolvent had made the same
representation to him concerning the 500/. which
he had made to Mr. Scales.

The debt of Mr. Matthews was for goods in the
way of.his trade, &C.
The insolvent denied the representation of the
legacy of 500/.; he admitted he had said something
about some expectancy from a relation of his wife.

The Learned Commissioner BOWEN said the con-
duct of the insolvent had been such that he should
not he entitled to his discharge until he sheuld have
been in prison six calendar month,.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

MANSION-HO USE.

CHARGE OF FORGERY.—Yesterday Mr. Cope,
the Marshal, brought before the LORD MAYOR a
man of gentlemanly appearance, named William
Collier, a surgeon in practice at Liverpool, upon a
charge of having forged the name of the executors
to a will in the transfer of a large sum of money.
The unfortunate man was obliged to sir during the
investigation, he was so deeply affected at his
situation.

Mr. Lumley, the barrister, attended for the pri-
soner ; Mr. Freshfield attended to prosecute for the
Bank of England.
Mr. Freshfield said that Mr. Collier, and a
Mr. Richard Squire, were trustees under the will of
Mary Martin, of Beaconsfield, Buckinghamshire,
upon trust to pay the dividends on a considerable
sum of money to the prisoner's wife. The prisoner
had no dominion over the money at all, but received
the dividends for his wife for several years. At
length, in January last, a transfer of the property
was made at the Bank under circumstances which
threw suspicion upon the prisoner, and the Bank
Solicitor immediately employed Mr. Cope, the Mar-
shal, who procured a warrant to apprehend Mr.
Collier. The prisoner was taken into custody and
charged with the offence.
Mr. Richard Squire stated that he was one of the
executors under the will of the late Mrs. Mary Mar-
tin, and he identified the probate of the will handed
to him by the Lord Mayor. The prisoner was his
co-executor. In the will was a bequest of a sum of
money for the benefit of Mrs. Sarah Collier. Wit-
ness and the prisoner invested the money in the
Three per Cents. Reduced. The prisoner, as it was
a matter of some convenience, received the dividends
for Mrs. Collier. Witness did not attend at the
Bank in January last for the purpose of transferring
the property mentioned in the will, and the writing
in the Bank transfer-book was not his writing.
George and Henry Wheeler were the witness's
stockbrokers on the occasion of making the original
transfer, and no other stockbrokers had been ern.
ployed. He declared that he never employed or
sanctioned the employment of Mr. Durant, the
stockbroker.
Mr. Lumley—How long is it since the original
transfer was made ? Mr. Squire—The date of the
original instrument is April, 1823.
Mr. Lumley—Look at the writing of your name,
and say whether you know whose it is ? Mr.
Squire—l do not know whose it is. It is evidently
the writing
of some person who is not at all ac-
quainted with my writing.
The LORD MAYOR—.Do you 'seep other accounts

lat the Bank ? Mr. Squire—Several. There are
many accounts in the Bank to which I invariably
attend myself.
The LORD MAYOR—Then you are known at the
Bank ? Mr. Squire—l believe I am; for I have
been in the habit of visiting it frequently for the last
thirty years. The transfer lately made was made to
William Collier, jun., who, I believe, is the son of
the prisoner.
The LORD MAYOR—Have you known the
prisoner ? Mr. Squire—My acquaintance with him
commenced in consequence of our co-executorship,
and did not extend beyond that. He is, as far as I
know, a respectable person. He uniformly received
his wife's dividends.
Mr. Blackburn, clerk to Mr. Durant, the stock-
broker, stated that the prisoner was introduced to
the office by a gentleman to transact business. The
prisoner called at the office on the 10th of January,
1833, and gave instructions in writing for the
transfer of a sum of money, and witness accompanied
him and another person, whom the prisoner intro-
duced as Mr. Squire, to the Bank, to sign the trans-
fer-book.
The LORD MAYOR asked whether the witness was
in the habit of doing business of so important a na-
ture in so loose a manner ?

Mr. Blackburn said that his employer did his bu-
siness as all the other respectable brokers were in the
habit of doing theirs.

The LORD MAYOR—Then I must say that so very
loose a mode of transacting business is calculated to
give great facilities to practices of a fraudulent na-
ture. It certainly is most improper.
Mr. Blackburn submitted that the house to which
he belonged was obliged to act in conformity with
the general practice of the most respectable brokers.
The LORD MAYOR—I say that certifying to the
knowledge of a person of whom you know nothing
is affording facilities to acts of fraud.

Mr. Blackburn said it was impossible to act upon
any other system than that which was generally
adopted. He then proceeded in his evidence. He
saw the prisoner and the person he considered to be
Mr. Squire sign the transfer-hook.

Another clerk in the employment of Mr. Durant
was present when the prisoner called and gave in-
structions to sell out stock in his name to the amount
of 1201. The prisoner afterwards gave him instruc-
tions to sell out 2,0441. 3s. Id. in the Reduced
Three per Cents. Witness made out the ticket,
which was drawn in the names of William Collier,
E. 1., of Stockenchurch, Oxen, and Richard Squire,
Esq., of King's Langley, Herts. Mr. Durant had
bought the 1201. stock for the prisoner, which was
sold on the occasion alluded to. The sale of the
stock and the transfer of the 2,044/. 3s. ld. took
place on the same day.
Mr. Rowland Durant in October transferred the
stock by virtue of a power of attorney granted by
Mr. Collier, jun. Witness transmitted the amount
in Bank post bills to Mr. Collier at Liverpool.
The LORD MAYOR again observed upon the im-
proper practice of certifying to the knowledge of an
unkno.v►u person.

Mr. Durant—The prisoner so completely iden-
tified himself with the person he introduced as Mr.
Squire—

The LORD MAYOR—I 9 this fair to the prisoner ?
I do not say whether you or your clerks acted
wrongly, but surely it would have been advisable
to compare the writing of Mr. Squire with that
which was pretended to be his writing in the trans-
fer-book. It appears that there was no resemblance
at all, so that the fabricator would have been at
once detected.

Mr. Durant said that the Bank knew nothing at
all of trust property.
The LORD MAYOR asked the prisoner's counsel
whether he wished to make any observation upon
the case.

Mr. Lumley said that the gentleman at the bar
was not chargeable with a guilty knowledge. " I
advise him," said Mr. Lumley, " not to say any
thing atpresent."

The LORD MAYOR—Prisoner, It is my duty to
commit you for trial. No ground has been stated
for remanding you, and I must therefore send you
to Newgate.
The prisoner, who leaned his head upon his
hands during the investigation, and appeared to be
overwhelmed with affliction, was then fully com-
mitted to Newgate. We understand the unfortu-
nate man has eight children. In the Justice-room
he was certainly an object of compassion.