The Sun.
London, England, 1867-05-30 00:00:00

At the Mansion-house, yesterday, Edward De
Vil!ars, the Frenchman, who s'and3 charged with
being concerned with a person named Thomas
Edgeley, formerly a merchant in London, in de-
frauding the late Leeds Bank by means of forgeries
relating to a pretende 1 -company called the May-
dampeck .Forest Company, to a very largo amount,
surrendered to undergo a furtbec examination upon
that charge. . .
Mr. Poland again atteud.:d to conduct the prose-
cution ; Mr. Sleigh appeared for the defence.
Soma additional evidenco was adduce I, the effect
of which appeared to be that no.concession relating
to the Maydampeck Forest Company, or of any
such concessions being made to ti au Cleef, the per-
son whose name has frequently been mentioned as
the concessionaire of the supposed company, was
found among the papers of the Leeds Banking
Company. It appeared, however, that Edgeley
himself had given a mortgage for ..£2,000 upon a
private estate bolo:aging to him at Bromley-le-Bow.
It was also proved that Greenland, the manager,
had the entire control of the privata security of the
bank.

Mr. John Grant, formerly clerk to Edgeley and
Co., deposed that when the various bills drawn by
the suppos,l Maydtmpeck Forest Compiny were

dishaaloured, ho used to go-round to the7-retrt-
notaries to take them up,; the funds being provided
by cheques drawn by .clgeley upon the Imperial
Bank. After the failure -of, the -Leeds Bank, no
more funds were provided to take up Such bills.
In answer to a question put by Mr. Sleigh, the
witness said that Mr. Watts, one of the partners of
the firm, upon one occasion said that some bill
were coming due and they sliQuld be ruined if they
were not paid, and " Old" Greenland would kick
up a row. (A. laugh.) Upon this, the witness said
that upon Watts making this observation he con-
sented to sign a fresh bill in the name of the pri-
soner, to replace the bill that was coming due.
Mr. Sleigh reminded the Witness that Mr. Watts,
in his evidence, denied that he was present when
such a transaction as he had referred to took place,
but he persisted in his statement that he was stand-
ing by him when he signed the bill.
A clerk from the London and Westminster Bank
proved that neither Edgeley andCo.,Willis and Co.,
Teel and Co., or the Maydampeck Forrest Company
kept an account at that bank. Some bills drawn
by that company were paid by the London and
Westminster Bank, but this was done under
the advice of their correspondents, Cozens and Co.,
at Leeds.

Susannah Dort ington, a person who was formerly
in the service of Mr. Edgeley, at Tottenham, proved
that the prisoner frequently used to visit Mr. Edge-
ley, and that he married a young lady from Edge-
ley's house.

Mr. Sleigh inquired if the fact of the prisoner
courting his sweetheart, and afterwards marrying
her, was to be proved as a part of the alleged con-
spiracy. (A laugh.)
Mr. Poland said this was all the evidence he was
in a condition to bring forward, and he asked for
the committal of the prisoner for conspiring with
Edgeley and others to defraud the Leeds Banking
Company. He also asked for his committal upon
the charge of forgery.

Mr. Sleigh then addressed the Lord Mayor at
considerable length, and he argued that whatever
might have been the nature of the transaction so
far as Edgeley and some of the other .persons were
concerned, that there really was no evidence against
the prisoaer, and that there was nothing to show
that he had any knowledge of the fraud that was
contemplate 1 and carried out.
The Lord Mayor, after some deliberation, said
that although a frau], had in all probability been
:carried out, it was clear -tirat; tinder any dream-,
stances, the prisoner was the least guilty, and, as
he did not think a conviction was likely to take
place, he should discharge him.