Star.
London, England, 1821-09-19 00:00:00

THS CASE OF MR. TURNER.

At about half-past two, William Swiney Barnard
Turner was placed at the bar. He came on crutches
with difficulty; and was assisted by the persons who
were in attendance.

The prisoner was then called upon to challenge
the Jurors in the usual form by the Clerk of the Ar-
raigns. The names of the Jury having been called over,
The indictment was then read, charging the pri-
soner with falsely forging and counterfeiting a cer-
tain transfer, with intent to defraud the Governor and
Company of the Bank of England.
Mr. Serjeant BOSANIALIET then addressed the Jury,
and observed that the present indictment, and two
others which followed it, arose out of the same trans-
action; and although in point of law it was not the
same, yet the facts would not be varied by any evi-
dence he could offer. A -Jury had investigated the
case, and had already pronounced its opinion upon
that evidence, and it was not for him now to ques-
tion it. He had, therefore, received instructions to

forbear giving any further testimony, and it would be
therefore the duty of the Jury to acquit the prisoner.
The prisoner was then pronounced Not Guilty upon
this and both the other indictments.
(The prisoner was removed from the bar, and was
ordered to be discharged out of custody, upon the
application of Mr. Actuv, Counsel for the prisoner.
Ma nas.sels Gaihtein, R German of the Jewish per-
suasion, was indicted capitally. for falsely making,
forging-, and connteifeiting a certain promissory note
for the payment of money, in the German language,
with intent to defraud Frederick William, king of
Prussia. In a : ecnd•count the prisoner was indicted
tor forging the instrument with intent to defraud
Baron •d'Algensteiri, a Minister of the said Frederick
William. king of Prussia. There were three other
counts charging the prisoner with aiding and assisting
in the iingery of the promissory note; and there
were twenty-lour other counts, laying the charge in
different forms.

The prisoner put in a plea of misnomer, that his
name was not Manasseh Goldstein, by which he was
indicted, hut Manasseh Isaac Golds/on. This he swore
by affidavit. The case was suffered, at the direction
of the Judge, to stand over for a short time, in order
that the Counsel for the prosecution might file a re-
plication, and that the plea in abatement might be
recordel—The prisoner was then removed from the
bar, and was replaced there after the lapse of an hour.
Mr. HOLLAND then said, that on the part of the
prosecution, he was prepared to prove that the pri-
soner was called indifferently either Goldston or
Goldstein, and that the appellation in the indictment
was correct.

Witnesses were then called to prove this fact. Foy
and Clements, the Officers who apprehended the pri-
soner, stated that the prisoner had called himself
Manasseh Goldstein," not Goldston; and another
witness stated, that in the shop of the prisoner, No.lo,
Ratcliffe I lighway, there was a board with the name
Goldstein upon it.
Mr. ANDREWS then addressed the Jury on the part
of the prisoner, and called several witnesses, who
swore that the prisoner had always been known by
the name of Goldston.

The Jury, after a few minutes deliberation, decided
that the prisoner was properly indicted by the name
of Goldstein.

The prisoner was then arraigned, and pleaded not
guilty to the charge. On account of the advanced
period of the day, the trial was deferred till to-morrow.
Win. Arons and Rachael Arons (calling themselves
husband and wife) were indicted for stealing a quan-
tity of woollen cloth, value £l5, the property of
Messrs. Leister and Blakesley, woollen-drapers, of
Basinghall-street. The prisoners were natives of
Germany, and the evidence was repeated to them in
German, through the medium of an interpreter.
It appeared from the evidence, that on Tuesday,
the 4th of September, the two prisoners went to the
warehouse of Messrs. Leister and Blakesley, and
asked to look at some blue cloth. They did not
purchase any, but said they would call again the
next day. The prisoners, however, did not call again
till Thursday, when they asked to look at the same
pieces of cloth which they had examined on the for-
mer occasion. Whilst the shopman went into a back
warehouse for the cloth, the female prisoner left the
shop. A porter.who saw her go out observed that
her appearance was bulky, and his suspicions being
excited, he followed her and brought her back. ft .
was then discovered that she had a piece of woollen
cloth rolled round her body. Nothing appeared to
hew that the male prisoner was a party to this act,
unless it could be inferred from his having opened
the door to let the woman out. When the woman
was brought back to the shop, and the property was
discovered upon her, he appeared angry with her,
struck her on the bonnet, and said, " Why did you
do that?" Mr. Leister swore positively that the
cloth was worth £l5.

The male prisoner, in his defence, said, that his
wife committed the theft unknown to him. This
assertion was supported by a' similar declaration
from the wife.

The COMMON SERJEANT, in charging the Jury, ob-
served, that it seemed evident that the mare prisoner
was cognizant of the act of the woman. If the Jury
believed that the prisoners were husband and wife,
it would be impossible to convict both of them, but
no evidence had been called to prove that they were
married.

At this time, an individual of respectable appear-
ance, in one of the galleries, addressing himself to
the Juryrobserved, that he thought it necessary that
they should have some person to measure and ascer-
tain the exact value of the cloth. This extraordinary
occurrence attracted the notice of the COMMON Send
JEANT, who asked the person in the gallery whether
he meant to give evidence as a witness? The man
replied, that he was only. induced to speak from
compassion for the situation of the female prisoner.
(The woman was far advanced in pregnancy, and
bore a beautiful child, about two years of age, in her
arms). He was proceeding to make some further
observations, when the COMMON SERJEANT directed
him to be silent, and not distract the attention of
the Jury.
A Juryman asked Mr. Leister whether the raw
material and the wages of the journeymen whilst it
was being manufactured into cloth, would cost £l5?
Mr. Leister replied that it would.
Shortly after the Jury returned a verdict against
both the prisoners of—Guilty of stealing under the
value of Fyieen Pounds.
This verdict secures the prisoners from the punish.
ment of death, which, by Sir James Mackintosh's
Act, attaches only to thefts above the value of £l5.

The Observer, of Sunday, Sept. 23, price Seven.
pence, will contain a lull Report of the Rev. Mr.
BLAcow's Trial, at Lancaster Assizes.

Coax EICHANCIIt,MAR[-LAN SE,?. 19.—The. favourable
change in the weather has caused a temporary suspension fn the
demand for almost all Grain, and particularly for Wheat, the
consumers having amply supplied themselves last week, whew
the state of the weather threatened the most serious cons..
quences to the outstanding crops; and the advance of prices
chat took place on Friday productd immense supplies on Mon-
day, for which there were very few buyers, and not one-tenth
part of what appeared was disposed of, although offers were
made at a reduction of Bs. per quarter from Friday's prices :
hence the quantity remaining over for'tbis morning's market was
very large, and, from the stagnated state of the trade, scarcely
any sales could be made, even at a decline of full 2s. per quarter
from Monday's prices. Beans are also offered on lower terms ;
and Oats may be quoted full Is. per quarter cheaper. In Barley
and other articles there is no alteration.

f

1