The Sun.
London, England, 1866-03-13 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MARCH 13, 1866.

THIRD EDITION.

SUN OFFICE, 7 o'CLocK.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE—This Day.

[BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.]
WARWICK RACES—This DAY.

RACING STAKES.

Sutton
Cockchafer
Cotillon

1

a
Seven ran.
TRIAL STAKES.

1

Saccharometer
Attache
Kangaroo
Five ran
WILLOUGHBY HANDICAP.

1

Beadle .
Flying Horse
Cutaway

Five ran.
STAND PLATE.

Gordian Knot 1
Tom Coke 2
Mongrel 3

Four ran.
SWEEPSTAKES. 8 furlongs.

1

2
3

visers of the Privy Council the diseaso was considered to
be identical with the rinderpest in cattle. There was, how-
ever, hope, that it would not spread as rapidly as that ter-
rible disease. Professors Symonds and Brown were the
gentlemen who had given their opinion on which ho had
answered the question.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE—This Day.

WARWICK RACES—Tins DAY.

HURDLE RACE•

Ace of Hearts 1
Acolyte
Ibox 3
_... .

Eight ran.
HANDICAP PLATE, (Five furlongs).
Skirmish 1
Pantaloon ....,
Tom Cooke.. .

The Extraordinary Charge of Forging the

Countess of Bellew's Will.

Mrs. Anne Casse, a lady, 80 years of age, of
Winterton House, St. John's Wood, appeared in
discharge of her personal recognisances of £l,OOO,
to answer the charges of having forged the signa-

ture of the late Caroline Countess Bel!ew to awill
or deed of gift ; of having likewise forged the Big-

nature of Esther Simmons to the same will, or deed
of gift, and further with uttering the same as the
genuine document.

Mr. Piffard, barrister, prosecuted. Mr. Lewis,
sen., of Ely-place, defended.

Upon the defendant being placed at the bar,

Mr. Lewis submitted that no offence had been
committed. By the 24th and 25th Vic., cap. 98,
sec. 21, it was necessarily to be proved that a will
was to be forged with intent to defraud. Bequests
to attesting witnesses were void, and there could
be no interest for Mrs. Came to defraud, as she
could have no claim, and nobody could be de-
frauded.

Mr. Arnold said could not the next of kin be
defrauded ?

Mr. Lewis contended that she could not defraud
herself.

Mr. Arnold—lf there were no will the property
would be divided among the next of kin, and her
forging the will might defraud those persons.
Mr. Lewis—The next point I submit is that the
alleged testamentary paper is not a will at all. It
merely purports to be a copy of a will made by the
Countess. The will itself is headed August, 1853,
and the will before you bears date 1863, and begins
by the words—" Copy of will or deed of gift." It
bears no date except August 5, 1863, and at the
end it states that it is a copy merely of a will made
in August, 1853. Mrs. Casse didn't attest this as
a will, but as a copy.

Mr. Arnold held that it was in substance made
and attested as a genuine will.

Mr. Lewis—The jury didn't find it was a will or
not. They only found that there was no evidence
to prove that it was the last will and testament of
the Countess. Mrs. Casse didn't propound this as
a will of the Countess ; she only gave it over as a
paper she had in her possession, and was in duty
bound to give it up. In point of fact and law there
was no intent to defraud, and no forgery to intent
to defraud. I only do it to save time, considering
my objections are well based. Mrs. Casse produced
it under a subpoena. If I forged your name to a
bill of exchange, and kept it in my possession to
look at, that cannot be said to be a forgery in law ;
or if a man have base coin in hie possession and does
not utter it he commits no offence, because there is
no intent to defraud. A person who made a false
signature to a will to defraud any parties, would,
on the death of the party, produce the instrument
and set about the fraud.

Mr. Arnold —lf these arguments are raised when
the case goes for trial: they had better be raised in a
superior court. I shall not decide them to stop the
case.

Mr. Edwin Dove—l am a cashier in the London
Joint-Stock Bank, Pall-mall. I knew the late
Countess Caroline Bellew. (Looking at letters
produced.) These are her handwriting. I don't
profess to understand her general handwriting. To
the best of my belief all these are her handwriting.
(Looking at the signature.) "C. Bellew" to the
will. I should say it was not in her handwriting.
.Cross-examined—l said I would not pay a cheque
upon the "C"in a letter produced. Upon all sig-
natures in the letters produced I would pay cheques.

Mr. Arnold—Look at the two documents pro-
duced at the trial. Would you pay upon both of
those signatures ? .

Answer—l would upon the one and question the
other. In all probability the latter would be de-
cided to be her handwriting.

By Mr. Lewis—l remember the entire bundle
being put into my hand in court.
Mr. Arnold—You looked at them just now, and
swore only two were shown to you.
Witness—Allow me to correct that.

By Mr. Lewis—l am well acquainted with Miss
Bellew's writing. This I should think was not like
her usual signature.

Mr. Lewis—lt was one of those very letters he
was handed on the trial and swore to.

Witness continued--That is her handwriting to
the best of my belief (looking at the signature to
the will through a piece of cartridge paper, the body
being concealed and the signature only visible.)

Mr. Lewis—That is the will I showed him.
'Great laughter).

Mr. Arnold—You may stand down, sir.
Mr. Lewis—A witness in our favour.
Some further evidence having been adduced, the
case was adjourned until to-morrow.