The Sun.
London, England, 1819-07-29 00:00:00

INFINT.

It will be recollected, that about a fortnight
ago this case was brought before the Court, and
it was then pOStpooL:d for sonic time on account
of t!)e absence of parties.
Mr. HART was now about to open the ease,
uhet he was interrupted by
Mr. WINGVIRLD, who appeared on behalf of
the defendant, tie said, that he had this -morn-
ing rete;ved a letter from the mother of the in-
fant, who was now resident at Livetpool, re-
apecting the order of the Court ; and he much
wished a short postponement of the case.
.111 r. HART thought that the present motion
would have no effect upon any ulterior proceedings.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said. that ibis was a
very delicate question. and he thought the hear-
log of the motion ought to be postponed for a
short time.

Mr. BART remarked, that the question would
be trkd by Jdry.

IVINGFIELI) threw out tint it was intended
to susinnid tk maintenance of the child, and the

presnt jiscils-ilon might lia\•e gre,vt ii,floci;ce on
the-oliiiii4te decision.

Mr. HART said, tl►at tl►e mother, a short nine
ago, lived only 25 miles front town, but now the
lived at Liverpool.

Mr. WINcriELD contradicted the assertion.

Mr. HART.—It the motion is nosy postponed,
there will be no time to bring it on before the long
vi“ al ion.

The LORD CHANCELLOR.----There will he plenty
of cline to try Ole question at the Lancaster
Assizes, which do, not begin until September.
The motion was ultimately postponed until this
day week.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

SALISBURY, JULY 21.

CROWN SIDE,--FORGERY.

THE KING V. THOMAS WEBB.

The proseentors of,this indictment were, Messrs.
Locke, Hughes, and Saunders, bankers, at the
Devizes, in this county, and the prisoner was
arrAigned tor forgery upon the usual counts. The
tact• were stated, on the part of the prosecution,
by Mr. 11.11),eARD L.swvs,•
Herm, &milder, is a partner in the house of
Locke, lingbes, and Saunders.. Theprisoner had
done business with the house. The transactions
begin in June last year ; he had uo -regular ac-
count with -the house ; several of the • prisoner's
checks had passed through the house, and evere
regularly honoured ; understood the prisoner was
a fellmonger at Wilton, in this coon y. In the
first instance, the Bank made advances upon the
credit of the neighbouring butchers.

Richard Tuck. Deere is a clerk in the Bank of
Locke, Hughes, and Saunders ; discounted the
bill in question for the prisoner on the 19th of
February, by direction of Mr. Saunders ; the pri-
soner indorsed the hill and received the money for
it, deducting the discount.
On his cross-examination, the witness said, that
the prisoner was asked in the usual course of bu-
siness to indorse the bill.

The bill was put in as follows !
London, 10th February, 1819.

L. 47 10 0
Tiro months after date pay to my order the Sinn of Forty-
seven Pounds Ten Shillings fur value received.

ROBT. JOHNSON.
To Mr. Robt. Noyes, 16, Eagle-street, Red Lion-square.
Accepted payable at No. 37, Chistvcll-street.
ROBT. NOYES.
_

(Indorsed) ROBT. JOHNSON,
JOHN WEBB.
James Sailgrove proved the presenting the bill
at No. 37, Chisvtelkstreet, where he saw an
elderly lady, and was told that they knew nothing
whatever of Robert Noyes.
John Owen, the occupier of the house No. 37,
Chit well-street, a public-house, never knew or
heard of a person of the Mime of Robert Noyes.
Thomas Sut!low had made inquiries at every
house in Eagle-street, Red Lion-square, and could
not hear that such a person as Robert Noyes lived
there, or hail ever lived there.
The Collectors of the Moors' and Watch Rates
for the two di3triets in which Eagle-streer is
si-
tuated, proved that no such person as Robert
Noyes was a householder in either of the distric!s.
Mr. C. F. Wituttiss, for the prisoner, sub-
atitted to the Court, that no case had been made
out ; but the Learned Judge (BEST) was of opi-
nion that there was enough to go to the Jury.—
Witnesses were then called for the defence.
Robert Johnson acknowledged himself the
drawer of the bill, and stated, that be knew
Robert. Noyes, the acceptor; saw him accept it,
anti enclosed it to thepri,ooer in a letter by post
from the General Post• Office in Lombard-street.
The letter produced was the letter sent with the
bill.

The Inspector of Franks, being called in,
proved that the letter had passed through the
London Post-Office on the lith of February last.
The letter was addressed to Mr. Webb, at a
factory near Wilton.
Mr: Johnson underwent a long examination and
cross•examinatian, during which he still persisted
in the reality of the existence of Noyes.
The witness was ordered by the Judge not to
leave the Court.

Sudlow vi s again called by the Judge, who
said, that he had called at every house in the street,
but could hear nothing of Robert Noyes.
Johnson being called again, said, that Noyes
was a person in debt.

Air. Justice Ilasr--,Then, Sir, you have been
instrumental in defrauding these bankers.
The Learned Judge summed up the evidence in
the most perspicuous manner, and accurately de-
fined the clime of forgery, which, he said, not only
included forging the name of a person actuallyin
existence, but Also applied to the use of the name of
an ideal person. If the Jury believed Johnson,
whose evidence was of a most doubtful nature,
they must acquit the prisoner ; but if they did
not believe him, then they could nor hesitate a
moment in finding him guilty ; it was for them to
decide, and the question entirely depended on the
credibility due to Johnson..
The Jury, after a very short consultation, re-
turned a verdict of—Not Guilty.