The Sun.
London, England, 1842-02-02 00:00:00

IN THE MATTER OF WM. BARNES.

In this case the insolvent, who had been already fre-
quently before the Court, and remanded from time to
time to compel him to give up certain property for the
benefit of his creditors, appeared in Court to receive
judgment, when

Mr.
M Commissioner LAW ordered the conditional dis-
charge of the insolvent, subject to handing the lease of
his property to the assignee of the Court.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.

EXTENSIVE FRAUDS ON CHARITABLE INSTITUTIONS.
- Wm. Yates, aged 45, described in the calendar as a
surgical-instrument maker, was indicted with forging
and issuing an order for Si., with intent to defraud the
president, vice-president, treasurer, and members of the
School for the Indigent Blind. It appeared from the
statements of Mr. Bodkin, that on the 14th of Decem-
ber last the prisoner called on the Messrs. Dodd, of
Billiter-square, who are the Secretaries for the Insti-
tution, and after representing himself to be the
steward of Sir Matthew Filmer, of Langley
Priory, in Kent, he produced a letter purporting to be
written by Sir Matthew Filmer, in which he was repre-
sented as expressing great interest in the different chari-
ties of London, and among them the School for the In-
digent Blind, and stating it to be the intention of Lady
Filmer and himself to subscribe twu guineas annually.
On the other side of the letter was an order on Messrs.
Drummond for Si. On perceiving this order Mr. Dodd,
jun., asked the prisoner if it was the intention of Sir
Matthew Filmer to make a donation of 51. to
the charity, to which he replied that it was not,
that he had some small purchases to make, and for that
purpose he was to have the 16s. Mr. Dodd then asked
the prisoner if the letter was written by the Member
for Kent, to which he replied that it was not, that the
Member's name was Sir Edmund Filmer, that he was
dead, and that Sir Matthew was the present Baronet.
Mr. Dodd then wrote two receipts for each of the two
guineas, and gave the prisoner 16s. On the cheque
being presented at Drummonds' it was returned, with
the statement that no such person banked at that house.
It was also proved that there was no such person as Sir
Matthew Filmer, no such place as Langley Priory, in
Kent, and that the letter and cheque were in the hand-
writing of the prisoner.
The case was most clearly made out against the
prisoner, who declined saying anything in his defence,
or calling any witnesses to his character.
The RECORDER having sulumed up, •

The Jury, without the slightest:hesitation, found the
prisoner Guilty.
There were several other similar indictments against
the prisoner, Which the Court thought ought to be
proceeded with. The next case was one charging the
prisoner with forging an order for 101., with intent to
Maraud the Directors of the Foundling Hospital. The
facts of. this case were nearly the same as the last, the

charge was clearly proved, and the Jury convicted the
prisoner.

- Mr. BODKIN, after inquiring if the Court thought it
inadvisable to proceed with any of the othercharges gainst
the prisoner, and being answered in the negative, observed,
that he considered it his duty to state that the prisoner
had been living all his life by writing begging
letters, and stating fictitious 'cases of distress. He
had himself been obliged to prosecute the prisoner about
ten or eleven years ago, for a similar offence, when he
was sentenced to seven years' transportation. Since the
term of that transportation had expired the prisoner had
been upwards of twenty times summarily convicted, and
lid had no hesitation in saying that the Mendicity So-
ciety could produce a cart-load of fictitious letters of
distress written by the prisoner, in most of which he
was sorry to say he had been successful.

The RECORD-ER sentenced the prisoner to transporta.
tion for life.

John Macy, egor was convicted of stealing on the 27th
of December last one mare, of the value of 301., the pro-
perty of Edward Edwards, Esq., and sentenced to ten
years transportation.
MORE STARVATION.—Mary Ann Eaton, a poor woman,
dressed in the workhouse garb, and who belonged to the
Hillingdon Union, Uxbridge, was placed at the bar
charged with stealing a bill-hook, the property of a
labouring man of the name of John Green.
It appeared that the prosecutor missed his hook the
day before Christmas-day, and on the day following he
heard of the prisoner offering the hook for sale, which he
identified as his property. The handle was gonefrom it, but
he could say it was his property by the blade. He had
made several marks on the handle, but, of course, he
could not swear to the hook by that. The witness
to whom the hook had been sold, said thut
he had given the prisoner 2.5• for it, and he believed she
had laid that amount out in bread for her children. Her
husband was living, but she did not know where he was,
and she had two children.

The prisoner said nothing in her defence.
The RECORDER in summing up, said the Jury must
not look to the effect of the verdict, but consider the
•ri:kence.

The Jury, after a short consultation, found the pri-
soner Not Guilty.
The RECORDER addressed the prisoner, and said the
Jury had acquitted her of the charge, and he was
glad they had done so consistently with the
evidence. They -had entertained a doubt and had,
accordingly, given the prisoner the benefit of
that doubt. As to punishment, it would have made no
difference whatever as to the verdict of the, jury. The
prisoner must be taken back to the union and taken
care of.