The Sun.
London, England, 1850-03-28 00:00:00

MARYLEBONE.

William Gulliver, aged 17, was charged with
having embezzled various sums of money received
by him for and on account of his ma=ter, Mr.
Willgoss, a stationer and news-agent,
38, High-street,
Portland Town.
_

Evidence was gone into which dearly established
the guilt of the prisoner, who, upon two charges, was
committed for trial.
WORSHIP-STREET.

EXTRAORDINARY INV;STILTION—A young man
of gentlemanly appearance, named William Langford
Jenkins, who was stated to be an articled clerk to a
solicitor, and a middle-aged man, named Charles
Pound, surrendered to their bail for further examina-
tion before Mr. Arnold, charged with obtaining, under
false and fraudulent representations, a sum of 8001.
in cash and bills of exchange from Mr. William
Newman, a colour manufacturer, in Great Curt-
street, loxton.
Mr. Ballantine, instructed by Mr. Vann, appeared
to conduct the prosecution ; Mr. Victor Hutchinson
attended on behalf of Jenkins ; and Mr. Hawking,
the barrister, with Mr. Games, the solicitor, on the
part of the other defendant, Pound.
From the statement of Mr. Ballantine, supported
by the evidence of the prosecutor and his son, it ap-
peared that, about the end of December last, the de-
fendant Pound called at Mr. Newman's house, accom.
panied by a nephew of the latter, who introduced
pr
him as his solicitor, and during the interview
duced a bill of exchange for 451. 95., drawn by
y
Pound, and accepted by Jenkins, which he fe
reques.
to_havecashed,representing the acceptor to be a- young
man who was about to come into possession of a large
fortune in a few months, and in corroboration of that
statement he produced a written document
purporting
to the will of Jenkin'wsuhripfoahVenrg,
to be a copy
an iromaster at Dudley, under
of 20,000/. would be paid to him one his
bequest
attaining his majority. As a further, voucher for the
truth of his assertions he stated that the testator
had
l
long banked with Williams, Deacon, and Co., upon
whom the bill was rendered payable, and who enter-
tained such a high esteem for the family that they
had recently a similar bill drawn by Jenkins, although
he was a minor. On the faith of these representations
he at once discounted the bid, and about a wetnks
afterwards was introduced to Jenkins at the house of

Boon I, who advated, in the former's presence, to the ,
specific amount of the legac-:,7 left him under his
father's will, to the accuracy of which the first-named
defendant tacitly assented. Jenkins subsequently
called alone at his house, and on the occasion of his
first visit induced him to advance him 2001. for the
liquiciltion of sundry bills for wine, jewellery, a
plawton, &c., which had been supplied to him by
various tradesmen, and afterwards obtained at
different interviews other sums in bills and
cash, amounting in the whole to a trifle short
of 8001. These he was solely induced to advance
upon the assumption of the will produced by Pound
being genuine; but circumstances having occurred
to excite suspicion, he prosecuted minute inquiries, •
which resulted in the discovery that Jenkins would
only be entitled to a house at Brighton and about 3001.
in the hands of the Accountant-General of the Court
of Chancery, where the estate was under .litigation,
Jenkins being one of the plaintiffs, and which sum
would probably be all swallowed up in expenses; and
it having been further ascertained that Pound was not
only not an attorney, hut had no justifiable pretensions
to such a character, instructions were given to the •
police, and both defendants were thereupon taken into
custody.
An office copy'of the will of the defendant Jenkins's
father was produced by Mr. Vann, and read by Mr.
Hurlstone, the second clerk, from which it appeared
that a mere general disposition of the property was
made in favour of Jenkins, but the amount was not
specified, and it contained no clause for any such
sum as 20,0001.

Mr. 0. Turner, managing Chancery clerk in the
office of Messrs. Palmer, France, and Palmer, solici-
tors for the executors appointed under the will, was
then called, and produced various documents and ac-
counts from the Accountant General's-office, to prove
the amount of money to which. Jenkins would be en•
titled on the final winding up of the affairs, which had
now been effected, but their reception as evidence was
objected to by Mr. Hawkins, and was accordingly
disallowed.

Mr. Richard Almond, a clerk from Messrs. Wil-
liams, Deacon, and Co.'s, proved that no person of the
name of William Jenkins had kept an account with
their firm since 1835, and that, upon searching their
books for the months of October and November last,
he found no account of bills discounted or cashed for
William Langford Jenkins during that period.
Mr. Hawkins severely contested numerous points
in the evidence affecting Pound, and addressed the
magistrate upon the facts of the case, which, as eli-
cited in the testimony of the prosecutor and his son/
he contended no jury would convict upon; and
Mr. Hutchinson, on behalf of Jenkins, submitted
that no case whatever had been made out against his
client, who was not proved to be at all cognizant of
the alleged false pretence, and was not even present
when the document purporting to be a copy of the
will was produced by Pound. The Learned Gentle-
man cited numerous decisions in support of his view
cf the law as affecting his client, but the magistrate
did not consider them strictly applicable to the pre
sent case, and

Mr. Bdllantine having requested a remand to enable
him to produce the probate of the will and other
formal documentary evidence,
Mr. ARNOLD expressed his concurrence, and the fur•
ther hearing was adjourned till that day week, the
defendants being liberated upon the same amount of
bail as upon the previous occasion, which was, Pound
himself in 2.0001., and two sureties of 1,0001. each ;
and two sureties in the same amount for the defendant
Jenkins, who, being a minor, was himself bound over
for his future appearance on pain of imprisonment.
The case, which occupied several hours, excited
great interest, and the court was inconveniently
crowded throughout the proceedings.