The Sun.
London, England, 1867-07-05 00:00:00

PROSECUTION FOR FORGERY.

At the High Court of Justiciary, Edinbutgh,
on Monday and Tuesday, John Porteous, mill-
master, aged 54, was placed at the bar, charged
with the forgery of his deceased brother's signa-
ture as acceptor to a bill for £750, of which he
was the drawer. The bill was dated 23d of June,
1862, and was payable five years after date. It
was uttered in November last, in security for a debt
owing by the prisoner to Messrs. Gibson and
Walker, grain merchants, and, if genuine, became
due on the 26th of June last. The alleged accep-
tor of the bill, William Porteous, died two months
after its date, and evidence was led to prove that
for three months previous to his death he was para-
lysed, and, according to the witnesses for the prose-
cution, quite unable to write his name. The de-
ceased left his estate, worth about £lO,OOO, to his
sister, Mrs. Pairman, passing over the prisoner with
a legacy of UOO, and to his other brothers and
sisters leaving nothing. IV some time before his
death ho lived in his sister's house,
and, owing to
the state of his health, saw nobody. The disposi-
tion of the testator's property naturally caused dis-
satisfaction on John's part, and he made a claim
for about £2,000 for cartage, to his brother, which
Mrs. Pairman compromised for £5OO. The pri-
soner appears to have long been in embarrassed cir-
cumstances, but nothing was heard by Mrs. Pair-
man of the bill till November, when she at once
pronounced it to be a forgery, and caused a letter
to be written to the authorities charging her brother
with that crime. He was not, however, apprehended
till January. In March, at the urgent solicitation
of the prisoner's family, Mrs. Pairman caused bail
to be found for her brother, bat for some time re-
sisted the application, endemouring to bring her
brother to a confession of his guilt. The prisoner
was liberated, but still refused to acknowledge the
crime, until at length, on tie 11th of April, he
wrote a letter stating that he regretted that he had
ever used or signed his brother's name. A great
deal of communing was held, iu meetings of brother
and sister on Bruutisfield Lisks, as to providing
the prisoner with money to leave the country, and
at one of the interviews the prisoner told his sister,
as she now alleged; that he had not signed the bill,
but bad seen the signature forged, and had been
' ill-advised by a bad set. The sum of £4O was
given to the prisoner's family for himself and son
to go to Ireland ; but he still delayed going, and at
lleetntgetrh to the authorities the
011fI rcso.Pairmanti
olwhwhich
handedwas
used against him at
the trial. In defence it was alleged that the stamp
of the bill was dated May, 1862 ; that shortly after
its pretended execution it had
been spoken of and
shown friends ; that the
paralysisyotfheoperidsoecneeasr
et mt
do
had chiefly affected his
aboutn the date of the bill he
lhoa)dv ebr
een extremities,able
t o
shakend Lands ; that from the mo-
ment the bill was uttered the Itisoner had stoutly
maintained its genuineness, and that he had refused
all proposals to confess, to leave the country, or to
evade the trial. The prisoner's
a
daughter accounted
for the letter of the 11th April by saying she had
urged her father to make pretence of confession to
please her aunt, who bad premised if she got a
confession not to make a bad ut of it, and to relieve
the family. Her aunt had long refused to get bail
for her father, but she had urged the point, as her
father was wanted at home My much. ller aunt
had frightened her into the belkf that her father was
guilty, and she urged him to &Mess. At last, when
she could not prevail on hint tc do so, she sail it
would be enough if he would only write his brother's
name on a slip of paper, and tlen write a letter to
say he was sorry he had ever tigned his brother's
name. It was in this way her father wrote the let-
ter of the 11th April. A good deal of evidence was
led as to the genuineness or falqy of the signature.
The Solicitor-General addressed the jury for the
Crown, pointing out the extraordinary character of
the transaction, in forging a bill at five years' date.
Mr. Young, for the defence, den:inced the proceed-
ings taken against the prisoner by his sister, who
wanted to wring a confession Irom him, and save
the costs And risks of a civil attion threatened by