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

money was sent in Bank-post bills, addressed to the prisoner,
at No. 2, Freeman.street, Liverpool.
mouth frequently
o 1.
April
last
Mr. Clark examined by Sir JAMES Se/Linz-IT—I am in
the employ of Messrs. Wheelers, the stockbrokers, who have
transactedltook h businesshis
s instructionsfor the prisoner.
sale lnof
20t017
Consols in the name of the prisoner. The sale was made on the
13th of April, 1833, and the 2001. stock was transferred to the
name of William Collier, Jun., and that sum of 2001. was part
of the gross sum of 2,0441. 3s. Id. standing in the names of the
prisoner and Mr. Squires. I was accompanied to the Bank by
a person, but I cannot say who that individual was. The transfer
signed Wm. Collier, Jun., I believe to be in the handwriting of
the prisoner.
Cross-examined by Mr. CLARKSON-I cannot undertake to
say that the signature might not be in the handwriting of the
prisoner's son, but I believe it to be the prisoner's writing.
There is a similarity in their handwriting.
Mr. Henderson recalled—There is no other sum except the
2001. standing in the Funds in the name of William Collier, jun.
Mr. John Rowland Durant examined by Sir JAMES SCAR-
LETT-I know the prisoner and remember the sale of some
stock for him being effected by him at my office. He subse-
quently applied to sell the 1,800/. and odd stock under a power of
attorney, and I asked if it would not be better that his son
should come to town to execute the transfer. The prisoner said
it would be inconvenient for his son to come to town when the
bank was open, which was then shut, and it was ultimately ar-
ranged that the transfer should be made by power of attorney,
which was subsequently forwarded by post to my office, exe-
cuted by the prisoner's son. The letter accompanying it di-
rected what I was to do with the proceeds of the sale, and was
from the prisoner's son.
Sir J. ScaaLErr proposed to read the letter.
Mr. CLARKSON objected, on the ground that a letter of the
prisoner's son could not be evidence against the prisoner.
Mr. Justice GASELEE overruled the objection.

Mr. James Hall Palmer, examined by Sir JAMES ScAlum.
—I know the prisoner's son, who is, I believe, a schoolmaster
at Stoke Church. I know the prisoner also, and of his going
to Liverpool. The warrant of attorney produced was executed
at my country house on the Ist of October, in the presence of
the prisoner, his son, my brother, and myself. The prisoner
came post to my country house, and said he expected to meet
his son there. The prisoner produced the power of attorney,
which the son executed, and the prisoner then took it away
with him.

Cross-examined by Mr. CLARKSON—The prisoner was going
into a partnership when he left Stoke Church to go to Liverpool.
The letter produced is in the handwriting of the prisoner's
son, who, I believe, is in Court.
Mr. CLARKSON requested his Lordship to take a note of his
objection to the letter of the prisoner's son to be given in evi-
dence.

Mr. Justice GASELEE took a note of the objection, and the
letter was put in and read. It directed the proceeds of the sale
to be forwarded in three Bank Post Bills, at seven days' date,
directed to Mr. Collier, 2, Freeman's-street, Liverpool.
Sir JAMES SCARLETT then put in the Bank Post Bills, all of
which were made payable to William Collier, Esq., and were
endorsed in the hand-writing of the prisoner. The bills
amounted to the sum of 1,604/. 13s. 7d.

Mr. Thomas Mowles examined by Mr. ADOLPHUS—I am a
clerk in the Bank of England, and produced the book contain
ing the transfer of stock made yesterday by Mr. Mullens, the
broker of the Bank of England, in the name of Mr. Ricardo,
to the names of Collier and Squire.
Mr. Mullens proved that he made the purchase of stock to
replace the loss yesterday, by order of the Governor and Com-
pany of the Bank of England.

-
Sir J. SCARLETT then said, this was the case for the pro.
secution.

Mr. TAYLOR took a legal objection to the indictment, and
contended that in point of law the prisoner had committed no
fraud on any of the parties named in the indictment.
The Court overruled the objection, and called upon the
prisoner for his defence.
The prisoner said that no fraud was intended upon the Bank
of England, and no demand had been made upon them to
supply the sum transferred.
Mr. Robert Burgess, of Stoke Church, Mr. Pitkin, Mr.
Thomas Dew, Mr. John Cole, and several other most respect-
able witnesses, gave the prisoner an unimpeachable character
for honesty and integrity up to the transaction for which the
prisoner now stood charged.
Mr. Justice GASELEE, with great minuteness and perspi-
cuity, summed up the evidence to the Jury.
At half-past one o'clock the Jury turned round to consider
their verdict, and, after a deliberation of short duration, pro-
nounced a verdict of guilty of uttering, knowing to be forged,
but not with the intent to defraud the Governor and Company
of the Bank.

The COURT told the Jury it was necessary they should find
the intent.

The Jury again turned round, and, after a short consulta-
tion, found the prisoner guilty generally ; but recommended the
prisoner to mercy, on account of his previous good character.

_
Mr. Justice GASELEE said the recommendation should be
forwarded to the Secretary of State.

NEW COURT.

(Before Mr. Sergeant ARABIA,)

John Ivey was indicted for stealing on the 16th of December,
nine pound of pork, the property of Charles Best, a cheese-
monger on Bethnal Green. The Jury convicted the prisoner,
and the Court sentenced him to seven years transportation.

James Crackum, a chimney sweep, was indicted for stealing
on the Xth of December a coat, the property of a Mr. Shipwash,
a dealer in mineral waters in Ryder.street.

From the statement of a person named Smith, a pal of the
prisoner's, it appeared that on Boxing Day he and the prisoner
went out together, for the purpose of taxing those whom they
had honoured with sweeping their chimneys, with the payment
of a gratuity in the shape of a Christmas box. Among the
rest they called on the prosecutor, the prisoner going into his
shop, the witness remaining outside. Shortly afterwards the
prisoner returned with the coat, which he said had been given
him by ➢lr. Shipwash for a Christmas box. The prisoner spoke
so confidently upon the subject that he induced the witness to
believe that Mr. Shipwash had really been generous enough
to give him the coat, and he made no hesitation to agree to
the request made by the prisoner to pledge the property for
thirteen shillings, with the produce of which they made
themselves merry, by drinking the compliments of the season
to each in libations worthy of the most accomplished Bac-
chanalian. _ _ _

The prisoner said nothing in his defence, and the jury found
him Guilty.

WHOLESALE ROBBERY OF LODGINGS.—John Bailey, an old
decrepid, but rather respectable looking man, was indicted for
stealing, on the 24th December, two beds, two pillows, sheets,
looking glasses, tables, tire-irons, and several other articles of
household property belonging to a poor widow named Martha
Catherine Townshend.

The Prosecutrix stated that the prisoner rented two rooms in
the parish of St. Pancras, one of which, in the month
of May last, she let, furnished, to the prisoner and his wife,
for 4s. a week. At first the rent was regularly paid, but ul-
timately they got 4/. in debt. On Christmas eve the prisoner
and his wife left the lodgings in a clandestine manner; and
on the prosecutrix entering the room which they had occupied,
she found it stripped of every thing.

A policeman apprehended the prisoner applying for relief at
St. Pancras workhouse, and immediately took him into cus-
tody, having been apprised by Mrs. Townshend of her loss.
The prisoner admitted that the property had been taken from
the room and pledged. His wife, however, had all the dupli-
cates, and he had sent her 80 miles in the country to keep her
out of trouble.

The prisoner, in his defence, during the whole of which
he appeared to be labouring under great distress of mind, said
that he was told by his wife that the prosecutrix had given
her permission to pledge the property. His wife had deserted
him, and he had not seen or heard of her since the night they
left the lodgings of the prosecutrix.
Mr. Sergeant AitABIN summed up the case to the Jury, who
immediately convicted the prisoner. The Learned Sergeant,
after the delivery of the verdict, said—Gentlemen, you will
hardly believe it, but the prisoner, who has made so pathetic
a defence, has been previously convicted.

In the course of the present week a free par.
don arrived at Newgate for Palma-, the associate of John
Minter Hart.

ANECDOTE OF BURNS.—" He delighted in
feats of rural activity and skill ; he loved to draw the
straightest furrow on his &Ids, to sow the largest quantity
of seed-corn of any farmer in the dale in a day, mow the
most rye-grass and clover in ten hours of exertion, and
stcok to the greatest number of reapers. In this he some-
times met with his match. After a hard strife, on the
harvest field, with a fellow-husbandman, in which the
Poet was equalled : Robert,'
said his rival, ' I m no
sae far behind this time, I'm thinking?'—'. John,' said he
in a whisper, ' you're behind in somethingung yet—l. made a
sang while I was stookine "—From Cunntnyhant, s
Edition of Burns, just published. ,
'
Two MILLIONS OF FIGHTING MEN.--The
following paragraph in the speech of 111 r. O'Connell, in
St. Paul's parish, will be found in the abbreviated report
we gave of that speech. "If we were to stand shoulder to
shoulder in the struggle no power upon earth could with.
hold our demands—(cheers). Yes, I repeat it; were we
to stand firmly shoulder to shoulder, not tile combined
power of the Russians and the Prussians, the Germans and
the Spaniards, and the French, could win a foot or a sod
of our fair and sacred soil—(loud cheers). We are eight
millions—(renewed cheers). We are two millions of
fighting men—(continued cheering): Of the eight mil-
lions, four are women ; two are under age to bear arms,
and there remain two millions of fighting men. Again, I'
repeat, that if we stood shoulder to shoulder, no power
under heaven could wrest from us a single
acre of our
lov
. us
theOh !prbeyutaws ew leialivaes been
divided. the
scoff of our enemies. The Chronicle has taunted us
with our divisions, and has said that the English did not
conquer Scotland. Why? for what should they conquer
it? It would not be worth the price of a conquest, while
every acre in Ireland was worth fighting for—(hear,
hear).
Had they conquered Scotland, they would have
given it back the next day as not worth holding--(a
I"94)."—Dublin Evening Post.
i