Star.
London, England, 1824-10-28 00:00:00

:Jr pll
TO WA

pi iscv
finds

P

• LOYDON SESSIONS; OCTOBER 27.

These Sessions. commented this day, before the Its-
c,oanza and a Bench of Aldermen.
Theilticonnsm, in addressing the Grand Jury, said.
thg upon looking over the calendar, he perceiVed
ch2ige Of fergcly which would require theit most at-
tentive consideration. In cases of conviction of such an
offence, the convict, it was 'mon n, was usually handed
over to the executioner. The forgery of a bond, or
deed, or power of attorney, was a thing of a much more
complex nature•than the forgeries which were generally
charged in Courts *of Justice. As to a deed, if after
execution of it by the bona jWe parties, any alteration
should be made which rendered it different from its ori-
ginal form, that alteration was a forgery, if proved to
have been unauthorized. If a power of attorney ap-
peared to have been executed three 'persons, and :hat
only one of three executed it, the act •was a forget y. The
ease to which he alluded (Mr. Fauntleroy':) would most
probably occupy a great part of the time of the Gentle.
men of the Grand Jury, whom, he therefote recom-
mended to dispose of the bills Of a leis complicat`ed na-
ture previously.
from this arrangement, it would appear, that there
is ne probability of Mr. Fauntleroy being put on his trial
until neat week, supposing that, from ulterior 'Circum-
stances, it is not traversed until next ge4sions, which,
perhaps, is not very problematical.
.1 •
The calendar contains the following charges•and
tentiens against this unfortunate Gentleman. The par-
ticulars of commitment a, thus: • t•
" Henry Fauntleroy, aged 40, banker, committed by J. E. Co-
nant, Esq• for uttering In the City of ondon a forged Letter
.9f,
Attorney for the sale of £5OO Long Annuities, well knowing the
same to be forged and counterfeited, with intent to defraud the
Governor and Company of the Bank of England."
The following are the detainers lodged:
lit. Uttering a forged Letter of Attorney for the sale of £5,000
Consolidated Three per Cent. Annuities, well knowing, &c.
2d. Uttering a forged Letter of Attorney fur the .ale of £.5,3150
Consolidated Four per Cent. Annuities, &c.
sd. Uttering a forged Letter of Attorney for the sale of £17,500
Navy Five per Cent. Annuities, &e.
4th. Uttering a forged Letter of Attorney for the sale of £lO,OOO
Three per Cent. Annuities, ace.
sth. Uttering a forged Letter of Attorney for the sale of £5,000
Consolidated Five per Cent. Annuities, &c.
6th. Uttering a forged Letter of Attorney for the sale of £46,000
Reduced Three per Cent. Annuities, &c.
7:h. Uttering a forged Letter of Attorney for the sale of £6,000
Four per Cent. Annuities.
The allegation in each charge is "he well knowing the same to
be forged and counterfeited, with intent to
.defraud the Governor
and Company of the Bank of England."
Charles Bramwell, a wine-merchant at Paddington,
stood indicted for assaulting William Walker, a Gentle-
man in the employ of Messes. Severn, King, and Co.
and Mary Ann, his wife. A cross bill had also been
found against Mr. Walker, for an assault on Mr. B.
Mr. Walker was returning with his wife and child
from a visit to his brother, when they were met in
Tower-street by the defendant Mr. Bramwell, and a Mr.
Shadgate, of the Excise, who had just left a dinner-
party in the neighbourhood ; and the charge against
Mt. Bramwell was, that in passing he put his hand very
indecently upon the person of Mrs. Walker; and upon
her husband's remonstrating with him for so doing, he
struck him a violent blow. With respect to the inde-
cent conduct towards the Lady, both she and her hus-
band swore positively. From the shape of the proceed-
ings, there being two indictments, Mr. Bramwell was
enabled to give his statement also upon oath; and he
positively swore that he never intended or did touch the
Lady at all, and that the first commencement of the
affray -Was by his receiving a kick from Mr. Walker,
who charged him at the time with having indecently
asaulted his. wife; that he denied having done so; that
Mr. Walker repeated the charge with insulting lan-
guage; and then—and not till then—he did strike him.
Mr. Shadgate coiroborated his friend's statement, de-
claring that he believed Mr. Bramwell did not touch the
Lady at all. If he had, he thought he must have seen it.
The lteconnEn put it to the Jury to say, whether
they believed it might not be a misconception on the
part of Mr. and Mrs. Walker, in which case he would
have been the first assailant? If, on the other hand,
they thought that Mr. Bramwell had laid his hand in-
decently upon the Lady, that was such a provocation as
fully justified the husband in the kick he was alleged
to have given.
The Jury, after some consultation, acquitted Mr.
Walker on the indictment against him; and pronounced
a verdict of Guilty on that against Mr. Bramwell, who
was immediately sentenced by the Court to pay a fine
of 201. to the King.
Lawlin was charged with assaulting W. Paulen,
one of the constables of St. Botolph, Aldgate.
Theprosecutor saw 'a person of respectable appear-
ance lying in die street, apparently intoxicated ; witness
went to his assistance, when prisoner threw out his arm,
aimed a blow at him, and seized him in an unmanly
Planner; witness took him into custody, and conveyed
him to the Compter. The prisoner was able to walk if
pleased, but when lie got part of the way he refused
Ito walk at all.
The prisoner cross-examined the witness, who denied
that he ever offered to compromise the matter for 10s.1
or on condition that he (prisoner) would stand a supper;
all he said was, that if prisoner would make an apology
he would abandon the prosecution.
The• Jury returned a verdict of Guilty of the common
assault, but recommended him to mercy on account of
his previous iinprisonment.—lmprisoned for one wetk.
A man named Ford was indicted for cornniiiting aft
assault upon 'the wife of his neighbour) Mrs. Martin, of
Field-lane) where they 'keep rival shop's.
The evidence, with respect to the assault, *as so con-
tradictory, that Mr. PHILLIPS said it reminded hint of
a case of robbery in his own country, in which the wit-
nesses were so determined to peove an alibi, that twenty
of them swore that the prisoner was in twenty different
places at the time the offence was committed.—The
pi isoner was convicted, fined a shilling, and ordered to
find sureties to keep the peace.