Star.
London, England, 1824-12-04 00:00:00

THE LITE MIL PAVNTLEROY.

It appears that the house of Marsh, Sibbald, and
Co, was formed about thirty years ago.. It consisted
of a Mr. Marsh, a partner in the firm of Marsh rind Co.
navy-agents, and Sir James Sibbald. These Gentle-
men could provide
,capital ; but as they were both ig-
norant of banking business, it became necessary to pro-
cure the assistance of a confie.ential clerk in some bank-
ing-house, who would be allowed to share in the pro-
fits of that business of which he was to be the sole con-
ductor. In their research they met with Mr. Emit-
leroy, sen. who bad been for years in the house of Bar-
clay and Co. in the City ; and Mr. Stracey, a near rela-
tive of Mr. Marsh, who had been for a year or two in
an East India house in the City, and then a very young
man, was also joined. The unhappy man who was re-
cently executed was educated by his father in the house.
Being eat ly initiated into the details of Marsh and Co.'s
;Jails, he was, on the death of his father, in 1807,
calleJ upon to take that situation in the management of
the concern which his patent had previously occupied.
in the year 1814, Mr. Graham, a relation of Mr.
3larsh, who haLiquitted the army in 1795, and who,
by the way, we believe never held higher rank than Cap-
tain, was taken into the house. Sir J. Sibbald died in
1S19; and from that time up to the period of Mr. Faunt-
leroys apprehension, the firm consisted of himself, Mr.
marsh, Mr. Stracey, and Mr. Graham. It is difficult
to point out the precise period at which Mr. Fauntleroy
commenced that system of fraud which ultimately led
to a premature and ignominious death. It is probable
that forgery was not tesorted to, until all other means
of relief were exhausted. Having the sole controul of
the affairs of the firm, he appears, at an early period,
to have forced a connexion, by no means profitable, by
:ndulging in the speculation of advancing money to
huiliers, to an extent which very considerably cramped

the house in its re.ources. Its credit in the City was
much shaken by the failure of Brickwood and Co. in
Ist°. What immediate means were adopted, after the
}.allure of Btickwood and Co. to support the reduced
milk of the house, does not distinctly appear; but it
bas been ascertained, that early in 1814, Mr. Fauntleroy
began to look throisgh the accounts of those customers
1/11 whose stock the firm received the half-yearly divi •
Jends: and, selecting those least likely to be called for,
to appropriate the principal to the use of the house. It
is known that the whole of the' money produced by
des of stock under forgeries found its way into the,
I,•)use ; but the apportionment of it, when there, has
only been ascertained to a partial ez•ent. Suffice it,
however, to say, that in the years 1814 and 1815, Mr.
Fauntleroy, in this manner, disposed of stock to the
'amount of 170,0001. and, when it is considered that

he had to provide the dividends, not only upon this
sum, but upon a constantly accumulating amount of
subsequent forgeries—that he had to replace much of
anal stock by purchasing at a very enhanced price—
taat he had been maintaining a personal expenditure
;ready beyond what the business could afford—and
that the house, under his auspices, still continued its
advances to builders, it will not be thought surprising
lowever monstrous it may be, that the amount of stock
silLl by Mr. Fauntleroy under forged powers, and
neither replaced nor accounted for to the stockholder,
amounts in sterling money to nearly 400,0001. This is
independent of frauds committed by misapplying sums
-eceived for the purpose of investing stock—of stock
told under genuine powers obtained by the prisoner, to
be used in events which did not arise, and of claims for
,ectitities deposited in the house, but made away with,
tucli will probably amount to the sum of 150,0001.
loore. The frauds of Mr. Fauntleroy were extended
through a period of ten years, with a degree of labour
and ;lit truly astonishing.
Some idea may be formed of the labour and anxiety
nd this proceeding, when it is considered, that latterly
lie was obliged to raise and to enter into the books of
the hnuse, dividends to the credit of the customers ex-
reeding the amount of those actually received by nearly
4,040/. per quarter. The forgery on Miss F. Young,
1A•ho was no relation to Mr. Fauntleroy) was effected in
1815. It was for this forgery that he was convicted
and executed. It appeared that Miss Young had al-
ways kept a banking-account at Marsh and Co.'s. In the
month of May, 1815, she was the holder of 5,450 k
Consols, and the house of Marsh and Co. had a power
of attorney to receive her dividends. On the 90th of
May, 1815, a power of attorney was obtained, in the
usual manner, at the Bank, for the sale of 5,0001. part
riche sum standing in Miss Young's name; and on the
31st, that power was left at the Bank, apparently duly
executed by Miss Young ; but it ultimately appeared
that her name, and the names of the two attesting wit-
nesses, were forged by Mr. Fauntleroy. The stoat was
mad on the Ist of June, by Mr. Spurling, a broker, to
Mr. Flower. On that day, Mr. Fauntleroy attended at',
the Bank to Istake the transfer, and the produce of the
stock was paid, on the same day, by Mr. Spin-ling into
Martin and Co.'s, a banking-house in the City, where
Marsh and Co. kept a large account. The produce of
this forgery was clearly traced from the broker, through
the house of Martin and Co. to Marsh and Co. and ul-
timately, in the prisoner's own hand-writing, to his own
especial crediN in his private account,.
The second indictment against the prisoner was 'or
forging and uttering a power of attorney, with intent
ti defraud Colonel T. Lyster of 6,0001. 4 per Cents.
iJo the 10dt of December, 1819. Colonel Lyster, who
left England, for St. Helena, in 1816, and did not re-
turn until 1821, had, for several years, kept a banking-
account with Marsh and Co. During his absence, he
t::rected his dividends to be invested. In April, 1819,
lie was possessed of a sum of 5,5031. Bs. 9d. in the 4
er Cents. In the month of July, in the same year, his
b.ila Ice, in the hands of the bankers, being 1,0011. 7s. I d.
Fatintleroy laid out that sum in 1,1411. 4.5. 6d.
4 per Cents. making a total of 6,64.41. 13s. 3d. He
enclosed an account of this purchase to Colonel Lyster,
together with a Stock receipt. Finding that Colonel
Lyster bad got into the habit -of accumulating, Mr.
Fauntleroy considered his as an account not likely to be
,oen wanted by the party, and therefore suited for his
P.lrpose. Ile forged a power of attorney, in which he de-
ribed " Col. Lyster, of Wexford, in Ireland, but now in ,
London," which power was executed on the 10th of,
December, 1819. Col. Lyster was, in fact, at St. Helena.
in order was sent to Mr. Spurting, the broker, to sell
out 0,0001. of this stock, which he accordingly did, and
Faontleroy attended at the Bank, Oh the 16th of
December, and under the forged power transferred
`OOO/. to the account of Mr. M'Niel, and 3,0004 to the
account of Mr. Clements, both jobbers. The produce
was paid by Mr. Standing into the account of Marsh
and Co, at Mat tin and Co.'s. .Colonel Lyster subse-
Tacitly gave directions for various puacha-es of stock
111 the same fund, which, with the balance left by Mr.
Vagnilerr 7, formed a total of 1,7351.6% which at the

Itime of the discovery of these frauds stood to his mint
in the Bank bOoks. On that sum the dividend was re-
ceived at the Bank, although the credit given by
Marsh and CO. to Colonel Lyster, and entered by Mr.
Fauntleroy himself, was for the dividend on 7,7351. Gs.

It appeared that the list of dividends becoming due to
persons for whom Marsh and Co. were authorised to re-
ceive them at the Bank, was prepared by Mr. Fauntle-
roy ; and in the last of those lists, the whole of which
was in his hand-writing, Colonel Lyster was thus en-
tered" Thomas Lyster, 1,7351. 6s.' and a dividend
warrant on that sum for 341. 14s. Id. was paid to
Marsh, though the entry in the books of the house is
"Thomas Lyster, 7,7351. 6s. dividend, 154./.145. Id."
and that entry also in Mr. Fauntleioy's hand-writing.
The produce of this forgery was paid into Martin and
' Co.'s; but such was the art of Mr. Fautttleroy, that every
effort to discover its final appropriation has been baffled.
The third indictment charged Mr. Fauntleroy for
forging and uttering a power iif attorney for the trans-
fer of 5,3001. 4. per cent. annuities, from the account of

H. Fauntleroy, J. D. Hume, and J. Gondchild,
trus-
teesof Mrs. Bellis and family. This tran..action, which
led to Fauntleroy's detection, was of a most atrocious
character. It appears that, in 1820, Colonel F. W.
Bellis was entitled to the following funds-17,5001.
Navy 5 per Cent,. 5,3001. 4 per Cents. 48,0001. Re-
duced ; 10,0001. Imperial. He determined to settle
these funds upon his wife and children, with a view,

perhaps, to avoid the legacy duty. The trustees named
were Mr. J. 1). Hume, an officer in the Customs ; Mr.

J. GoodchilJ, then a surgeon at Westerham ; and Mr.
Faantleroy ; and a deed was prepared accordingly, de-
claring the trusts of the settlement. The funds which
were standing in the name of Colonel Bellis were trans-
ferred on the 9th of August, 1820, to the trustees; and
on the 9th of September, Mr. F•µntleroy commenced,
by selling out, under forged powers of attorney,l7,sool.
Navy 5 per Cents. On the 18t.h of September he sold
out the 10,0001. Imperial ; and on the 2J of Novem-
ber he sold out 46,0001. Reduced, and the 5,3001. 4 per

Cents.in question. The trust of this 'pat ticular suni
was for Ovlonel Bellis during his life, and for his nine
children on his decease. The forged power of attorney,
under which this stock was transferred, bore date the

Stith of October. The signature of H. Fauntleroy, and
of two of the attesting witnesses, James Tyson, and Jo-
seph Golightly, were genuine; but that of Mr. Hume,
and the signatures of Sir It. and Lady liardinge, with the
signature of the other trustee, Mr.Goodchild,were forged.
On the 2cl of November, the stock was transferred by
Mr. Graham, who states, that all he knew of the trans-
action was, that Mr. Fauntleroy desired him, if he were
going into the City, to call upon the broker, where he
would find some transfers ready, and he had done so.
Mr. Graham, who, though in business since 1796, is
described as being very unacquainted with, business,
was hardly allowed to ask any questions as to the trans-
actions of the house, and Mr. Fauntleroy seemed to have
availed himself of this circumstance to make Mr.
Graham transfer stock to an enormous amount under
forgeries. Colonel Bellis's trust stock was not sold by
Mr. Spurling, the regular broker of the house, but by
another broker, named Simpson, whom Mr. Fauntleroy
professed to be desirous to serve. The prisoner's rea-
son, however, for employing another broker was, be-
cause Spurling, having witnessed the transfers trom the
name of Colonel Bellis to the trustees sty recently,
would have thought something wrong if he had
found this stock sold out by the trustees so soon
after it carte into their names. The sum of

15,2111. 13s. 9J. for which Mr. Simpson sold the
5.3001. 4 per cents. and 16,0001. Reduced, he paid
as follows s-10,0001. at Marsh and Co.'s, which
is entered in the waste-bock in Mr. Fauntleroy's own
hand to the credit of an account, a H. F., W. B." and
the balance, 5,2111. 13s. 9.1. was paid to Martin and
Co. in a check, which sunk is also entered in Marsh and
Co.'s day-book to the credit of "H.F. W. B." Upon
that account Mr. Fauntleroy alone drew. This. was one
of the most monstrous specimens of impudent fraud
that ever was practised; tor it was from this very art-
count,-" H. F. W. B. that, in the August preceding,
Mr. Fauntleroy had drawn upwards of 50,0001. to
buy the identical stock of Colonel Bellis, then sold out.
The dividends were punctually credited on this £5,300
Four per Cents. The mode of receiving and crediting
the dividends in Miss Young's and Colonel Lyster's case
applies here, with this difference—that in the present
case, the prisoner cleared the account entirely. It was
not, therefore, a question of crediting £lO6 half-yearly,
when he received only £5O, but of crediting £lO6 where
he received not a farthing. Colonel Bella died in Ja-
nuary last, leaving his widow, and two daughters of
age, one daughter 17 years old, and seven younger
children. It was considered prudent by the trustees,
under the advice of Mr. Hughes, their solicitor, to ad-
minister the affairs of the estate under the direction of
the Court of Chancery. This, for obvious reasons, was
strenuously opposed by Mr. Fauntleroy. His arguments
appeared to have little weight with his co-trustees, but
the case was different with the Ladies. Lr their eyes
the conduct of Mr. Fauntleroy was disinherited, but
that of-the solicitor clearly interested. Mr. Fauntleroy
called on Mrs. Bellis, and she addressed a letter (dicta-
ted by Mr.-F.) to Mr. Hughes, expressing her displea-
sure at the steps he had taken in Chancery, and com-
manding that all further proceedings should be stayed.
This letter was inclosed in one from Mrs. Beats to
Mr. Fauntleroy, to be made use of if necessary ; but
it appeared that Mr. Hughes, Lading that nothing
effectual could be done before the closing of the offices,
consented to allow the matter to stand over the long va-
cation. -Thus the business stood, and various meetings
of the trustees took place, in which the fact of the
existence of the funds was the basis of the whole discus-
sion. Mr. Fkuntleroy argued that it was hard to take
out of the hands of the banking•house such an account
for the purpose of placing it in those of the Accountant-
, General of the Court of Chancery. Mr, Hughes sup-
posed this to be the real objection, but the perseverance
of Mr. Fauntleroy's conduct was such, that the co-
trustees became suspicious. Application was made at
the Bank on the 9th of September, and it being dis-
covered that the stocks were all gone, a warrant was
obtained, and Mr. Fauntleroy was taken next morning.
His first attempt was to arringe the matter, by giving
security to replace the stock, &c. but that of course, was
out of the question. Some documents were found in
Mr. Fauntleroy's desk which threw considerable light
on his turther intentions, and form a branch of the
fraud of a nitst extraordinary description. It appears
that Mr. Fauntleroy, in the month of August, finding
that he could not do away entirely with the Chancery
suit, had endeavoured to obtain 'a respite till November
—not, as was at first supposed, to go- to America
with what money he could put together, but to in•
volve himself, if possible, more deeply in a tissue of
fraud; and, but for the suspicions of the trustees,

which cut short the thread of his pursuits,' he.
would have again commenced a new series of forgery.
On searching his private desk, there was found a power
of attoriey, not etecuted, for the transfer of the sum of
5,3001.4 per Cents. from the Nelme of alr. E. Collins,
of Frolsworth, in Leicestershire; a customer of the
house, to the trustees of Colonel liellis—that Messrs.
Fauntleroy, Hume, and Goodchild. This power was
delivered from the 1.14nk, on the 18th /loom, 182 t, in

. -
consequence of a ticket in Mr. Fauntlerny's
writing. In this fraudulent niAnner there C3ll be no
doubt but that, for the intervention of the circumstances

already mentioned, the whole of this stock would have
been replaced in time to transfer to the Accountant-
General. By the fourth indictment, Mr. l; au? le
roy was charged with firging and Dueling as tine,
a power of attorney, for the trap-fer and sale cr,
4841. Long Annuities, from the accnnnt of John
Griffith. Mr. G. in the month of June, 1823,
became
possessed of a sum of 6841. 19s. Long Annuities, which,
on the sth of that month was transferred into his name.

Oo the same day his brother obtai:,ed a power of attor-
ney to the house of Marsh attd Co.fOr the receipt of di-
vidends on his fund, and the power was sent down to Mr.
Griffith, who resided in Devonshire, for his execution.
He accordingly did execute it, •and it was forwarded to
the house of Marsh and Co. Mr. Griffith had been an

old customer of the house; and Mr. Ksuntleroy, know-
ing that he was Hot likely to make any troublesome in-
quiries respecting his stock, determined to, approliriate
it to his own use. With that view, he, on thy 13th of
Jose, procured a blank power of attorney ,fok the sale
of 5001. of this very stock, such power having been ob-
tained at the Bank by a ticket in Mr. Fauntleroy's hand-
writing. He immediately proceeded to concoct the
regular signature and attestations; and for that purpose
he imitated the writing of Mr. J. GAO) and his son,
(the latter being an attesting witness,) which were af-
fixed to the power of attorney for the receipt of divi-
dends which was in his possession. The other attest-

ing witness to the power of attorney for the re-
ceirt of dividends was a Captain Bailey, of the Royal

Chediire Miiitia, whose signature being long, and in
a confined hand, he did not think proper to imitate, but
substituted the signature of " James Kirby, clerk at
Marsh's?' He then dispatched the forged power into
the City, to be acted on. In this case, his directions were
given to Mr. Simpson, one of his private brokers, to
raise £lO,OOO. For this purpose, Mr. Simpson sold
£484 Long Annuities, and on the 30th of June, Mr.
Fauntleroy attended at the Bank, and transferred the
stock under the forged power, leaving only £199 6s.
standing to the credit of Mr. Griffith. The, brokerage
on this transaction was £l3, to one half of which Mr.
Fauntleroy was entitled ; and accordingly Mr. Simpson
drew a check in favour of him for £lO,OOO 10s. which
there is no doubt, from certain marks on it, was paid
into his own hands. In Martin and Co.'s pass-book this
was credited to H. Fauntleroy on the 30th of June; but
in the book kept by Marsh and Co. to check that of
Martin and Co. there was no sum approaching to this
entered on the 30th of June. On the 2d of July, bows
ever, there was entered in Mr. Fauntleroy's hand-writing
" July. 2, Cash £10,000," and in the day-book of
.Marsh and Co. under the date of July 2, was entered
" H. F. 5,600/. ditto 4,4.001." and in the private ledger
,there was an entry in Colonel Graham's hand-writing,
crediting Mr. Fauntleroy to that amount in his private
account. This instance presented another specimen of
the irregular manner in which the business of this
house was conducted. There was no doubt that the
10,0001. in question was the produce received from the
sale of Mr. Griffith's stock ; yet those who had the in-
vestigation of the case were totally unable to trace
what becante\of the 61.105. for brokerage. The sum un-
doubtedly wai small; but a banking-house which could
allow such an ekror to pass unnoticed must have been suh.,
ject to any imposition that might be practised,as an error'
of 6/. would equally defeat the balance as an error 6,000 i.
The power for sale contained a clause for dividenN
and under this, the October and April dividends on the
balance of 1991.65. standing to the credit of Mr. Gas
fith, were duly received—namely, 991.135. in each pay
ment; instead of which, there was credited to Mr.
Griffith, at each of these periods, in Marsh and
Co.'s books, the sum of 3411. 13s. being the full divi-
dend o* the entire of Mr. Griffith's stock. The entry
of 341/.131. to the credit of Mr. Griffith, as a dividend
on his Long Annuities, was in Mr. Fauntleroy's hand-
writing. He could not have taken it from the real divi-
dend-warrant, which was for 991. 13s. only. The an-
swer was quite obvious : he had sold out as much of
Mr. Griffith's stock as would make the precise difference
between 991. I 3s. and 3111. 13s. He had received the
produce, and he knew that the stock was not standing
in Mr. Griffith's name—but that Mr. Griffith was ea-
titled to credit for it, the sale having been made with-
out any authority.— Times.
A great deal of business continues to be done in the
Shares of Public Companies. The Liverpool and Man-
chester Rsil Road shares have been sold at a premium
of forty guineas each ; for the vast importance of this.
undertaking to commerce is so apparent, that no doubt
is entertained of their Bill being passed through Parlia-
ment next Session.
The practice of the Banisters who are accustomed to
do business at the Old Bailey Cout ts has hitherto proved
very unprofitable this Sessions. It probably was never
known to occur-before, that on the first day of the Se.-
siotis, of 42 prisoners who took their trial, one only was
defended by Counsel. Perhaps the advantage of parties
employing professional, advocates may be fairly infer-
red from the fact, that of the above number of prison-
ers, 36 were convicted.
A true bill was found at the last Marlborough Ses-
sions against Joseph Hayae, Esq. of Burderop Park,
Whiteheaded Bob, alias Robert Baldwin, and others,
for assaulting the steward of the former Gentleman.—
On Thursday week last, we are informed, Mr. Hayne
entered into recognizances of 50/. for himself, and for
each of his companions in this affair, for his and their
appearance at the new Devizes Session.
The boiling-houie and still-house, at Richmond estate,
St. Ann's Jamaica, were totally consumed by fire, as'
also thirty .two hogsheads of sugar and six puncheons of
rum. The fire is supposed to have originated by a spark
from the still-horse chimney falling n the roof.
It appears from a provincial paper, that a Clergy-
man of. the Established Church has been imitating the
Catholic Clergy of France in refusing the rites of Chris-
tian burial—not to an actor Certainly, bin to as inof-
fensive a character, a fisherman. The friends of the
poor man attended in the Church-yard with the body,
'when they were met by the priest, who, taking hold of
the coffin, said it should not enter the Church. The
reason alleged was, that as the deceased never went to
Church when alive, he would take care that he did not
go in when • dead. Now, we think that a clergyman
guilty of such conduct would not be worth hea: log.