The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-25 00:00:00

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, June 23.
(Special Jury Cases.)
THE QUEEN V. GOMPERTZ ♦ND OTHERS.
Mr. COCEBURN stated this was an indictment against Henry
Gompertz, William Witham, and Robert Witham, for having
conspired to defraud, under false pretences, George Pitt Rose,
eldest son of Sir George H. Rose, Bart., and late a captain in the
9th Lancers, of bills or acceptances to the amount of about
17,000/., for which the prosecutor was either now liable or had
been sued. These transactions had taken place in consequence of
Captain Rose's temporary inconvenience for the want of money,
which led him imprudently into a snare by confessing his embarrass.
ment to H. Gompertz, who, under the pretext of relieving him,
had. with others mentioned in the indictment, obtained accept-
ances to a large amount from him in favour of H. Gompertz, for
which he had received only 1,500/., or rather 1,200/, as 300/.
was swallowed up in expenses, charges, and discount upon this
part of the transaction. The indictment had originally comprised
Charles Lewis; but upon the intimation from Mr. Hobler, the
attorney for the prosecution, that Lewis would serve the case as a
witness, he was not proceeded against.
The first witness examined was the trosecutor.
Captain Rese, son of Sir George H. Rose, Bart., and a captain
on half-pay in the 9th Lancers, stated, that he in July, 1841,
wanted some money, and was introduced to H. Gompertz, at
Hatchett's Hotel, by C. Lewis, the attorney, for that purpose.
H. Gompertz proposed they should raise money together, Wit-
ness declined to do so, as he wanted only a sum to pay his father,
in order that he should be restored to the entail of an estate which
he had cut off: It was then proposed by Gompertz that the wit-
ness should accept a bill for 5,000/. He (the witness) said he
should not have money to pay the bill ; but lie finally consented to
accept, Gompertz agreeing to make himself liable equally for its
amount when due. The object was to raise finally 40,000/. Ginn.
pert' said he could get Captain Rose 30,000/. of it.
Afterwards another bill was accepted for 1,0001., and the
captain then received 1,500/. in cash, or rather 1,2001., the
expenses swallowing up 300/. of the 1,5001. advanced him
on the 6,000. worth of bills. Gempertz told him he was to
get the 30,0001. from a Mr. Parker, a client, it was said,
of Messrs. Witham, attorneys, of Gray's.inn.square. This hap-
pened in July, 1841. Mr. Parker was said to be a person of large
property, residing both at Cheltenham and at Paris, having some
trust.money of a lady who was a relative of his, and which he
wished to place out in productive loans to her advantage. In
August, 1841, the witness saw Robert Witham at the office of his
father in Gray's Inn. A proposal was made to him to take wine
warrants for his acceptances. The wine was said to be Witham's
and worth 2,0001., and he yielded to the solicitation of Robert
Witham to take the wine warrants, and to try to raise money upon
them. He reluctantly signed stamped paper to the extent:ef 2,0501.,
501. to cover the expense; requiring, however, that Robert Witham
should snake and give him a written statement of the transaction,
which was accordingly made out, stating that " our client," mean.
ing Mr. Parker, would complete the loan within a month. The
paper was signed R. Witham for Wm. Witham. The wine was.
rants witness never had, but he received instead certainly 2001.
Afterwards an agreement was drawn up between the parties, con-
tracting that the 2,0501. was to be deducted out of the general
loan when effected. A new party now entered on the scene, and
changed the character of the whole affair. The witness was applied
to by an attorney named Parr, living at Poole, for a debt of 1,000/.,
due by the witness to a Mr. Slade. Mr. Parr received assurances
that his client should be paid out of the loan that was then almost,
they said, concluded, and an order was given him upon Witham
for 1,0001., which, It was alleged, was not paid, because the order
had not also been signed by Gompertz, as agreed upon. Mr. Parr,
who had come up from Poole to town, where he had been delayed
by these assurances for some days, became angry, and left London
without receiving the 1,000/. He had not since been paid, owing
to the deceptions practised upon the witness, who had been much
annoyed and injured in other respects by the effkts of this con.
spiracy to defraud him, and to possess his acceptances, without re-
turning him their value.
Mr. Montague Chambers and Mr. Hawkins were also engaged
for the prosecution; Mr. F. Kelly and Mt. Humphreys for William
Witham; Mr. Cowling and Mr. Watson for Robert Witham; and
Mr. M. D. Hill and Mr. Peacock for Henry Gompertz.
Captain Rose was subjected to a cross-examination, which lasted
for three hours. Mr. F. KELLY exerted great ingenuity and per-
severance in his endeavour to shake his evidence. The witness
acknowledged he had been some time acquainted with Gompertz,
and that when the loan of money was discussed between them,
that he had made the offer to produce his title deeds to his in-
heritance, as the ground of the loan he sought. These deeds were
the basis of his title. He had told Gompertz at the time that he
had cut off his entail to the inheritance, in consequence of his
being in want of the money it was valued at ; that sum (8,000/.) he
had received from his father, Sir George Rose, who was, however,
disposed to let him repurchase the entailed right when he could pro-
cure the money to pay his father what he owed him. In consequence
of this proposition, the deeds and a copy of the conveyance were sent to
Messrs. Witham's office, at Gray's lon. Mr. Sewell, the attorney
of Sir George Rose, had been mentioned as a fit person to raise
him the money. The estates were on examination found to be
much encumbered by charges, perhaps as much as 60,000/. ; and
it was said that there was no security for a lender of money to
make any further advance upon the property. In 1839 he had
applied to his father, and, through Lord Morton, obtained his
consent to allow him to repurchase his reversionary interest in
the estate of his father. It was arranged that he should do so upon
advancing 7,0001.. and the interest due. He had three interviews
with one or other of the Withams about this affair; sad Mr.
Witham told him it was a Mr. Parker who was to carry out this
loan, and that he (Parker) was his friend.
Cross.examined by Mr. WATSON, Q.C.—Had revoked his power
to Greenwood to act for him as his agent. Francis and Robert
Witham were brothers, included in the indictment, but Francis
had since died. The witness deniedstrongly that he had ever told
Robert that all was right about the loan, and all that was wanted
to its accomplishment was, that he, Witham, should write a letter
to that effect. When the first bill was given to Gompertz Robert
Witham was present. The witness would not sign until after the
documents were given him. Had settled a debt he owed Charles
Lewis by a mortgage on his estate in the West Indies, independent
of the money owing as compensation for slaves set at liberty by the
Act of Parliament. Was then receiving 500!. a year from his
father ; an annuity of 2001. a year from another source, and his pay
of 1301. a year; altogether 8301. a year, payable quarterly. Gom.
pertz had accepted bills for 1,500/. for him, but they were given to
Buck or Slade for services rendered to him (the witness). 16,500!.
was the amount of the acceptances obtained by Gompertz and his
parties. He was embarrassed by these fraudulent bills being out
in the market, but it was useless trying to settle with his other
creditors, such as Mr. Bayley and others, until he had prosecuted
these fraudulent parties, and got up the bills. His whole debts
were trifling. Those for which he had received value were only
2,0004, which he could pay with the produce of his commission,
which alone was worth 2,2501. He would certainly repay all
he had received, independently of the resources of mortgaging his
other property.

Mr. R. H. Parr, attorney, residing at Poole, detailed th*ir.
cumstances under which he came to town to recover for Mr. Slade
1,0001. owing to him by Capt. Rose.

Mr. Lahee, auctioneer, of Bath, stated that Gompertz had dis.
counted a bill accepted by Captain Rose with him. He had been
assured first by Gompertz that Rose had a large interest in rever.
sion, which he was about to sell, and this bill was to be paid out of
the proceeds. The Withams were consulted. The son said !that
55,000/. was to be advanced by Parker to Rose. He explained that
Mr. Smith, of Bedford-row, was acting for Mr. Parker ; that the
order of time would be observed as to the payment of the bill. The
father was writing, with his back to him. Being asked if he
would advise a client to advance money on such a security
as this, he gave an answer in the affirmative. He then
advanced 601. more to Gompertz. Receiving a note from him to
introduce him to Mr. Parker, at Hatchett's, he took pains to find
him out, but the landlord said there was no one known there of the
name but the driver of one of the short coaches.—(Great laugh-
ter.) The witness never had the note, or got his money.
A clerk in Hoare's bank proved there was no one banking at
their house in 1841 of the name of Parker, residing at either Paris
or Cheltenham, or having 55,0001. to put out in their hands.
Mr. Du Pasquier, clerk to Mr. Mattock, solicitor, had in 1641
been induced by Gompertz to lend 300/. on an acceptance of Rose,
on the assurance that he was then raising 45,0001. on a sale of his
estate in reversion, the deeds for which were then preparing.
Mr. Witham, being applied to, said he knew nothing of the
transaction. The money advanced was never repaid.

A bill passed to Mr. Elderton for 5001. The acceptance of Capt.
Rose was put in.

Mr. Sewell
Oculars.

Captain Rose's statements in some par.

Charles T. Lewis, clerk of the papers in the Queen's Bench
Prison, produced his books containing the names of prisoners con-
fined. He referred to the following entries therein :—Henry
Gompertz, a prisoner for debts amounting to 22,0001., in 1939,
liberated in 1840 by the Insolvent Act—again a prisoner in 1842
for 9,0101., liberated in 1843 by the operation of the Insolvent
Act—again in 1842 a prisoner for 1,7001., liberated under the In-
solvent Act on the 10th of February, 1845.
Mr. Peacock addressed the jury in favour of Henry Gompertz
considerable length. at
Mr. F. Kelly followed for Mr. W. Witham in a speech of great
ingenuity and force, which lasted till past eight o'clock.
When Lord Denman expressed his intention to hear the rest of
the argument to-morrow (this day).

JUNE 2.4.
(Before Lord DENMAN and a Special Jury.)
ROSE V. GOMPERTZ AND OTHERS.
This case—an indictment at the prosecution of Captain Rose
for a conspiracy to obtain from him certain bills of exchange to
the amount of upwards of 17,0001. by fraudulent representations—
was resumed this morning by the examination of witnesses for the
defence.

Mr. COCK BURN, 0,C., in a most able and ingenious address,
replied on the part of the plaintiff, commenting severely on the
oourae adopted by counsel on the other side in attempting to shield
the defendant* undo insizationa out upoß tbe Pislll44 and