Star.
London, England, 1821-09-20 00:00:00

OLD BAILEY SESSIONS.

Yesterday William Harding, aged 55. was charged
with stealing six sheep, the property of Tlios.llen.
Thomas Billen, the prosecutor, deposed, that on
the 6th of July he saw his sheep in his field at Hen-
don. On the next day he missed them, and afterwards
saw them at Smithfield, under the care of a drover.
Thomas Abrahams, a drover, servant to Luke
Waugh, recollected that on a Monday the prosecutor
saw him at Smithfield with six sheep. He (the wit-
gess) first saw the sheep at Smithfield the Friday be-
fore, in the possession of the prisoner. On the Mon-
day following he was employed to drive the sheep
from Hackney to Smithfield.
J. Fildey deposed, that on Friday, the 6th of July,
he bought six sheep from the prisoner at Smithfield.
On the Monday following he employed the laq wit-
rhess to Iftive the sheep from Hackney, whither the
prisoner had taken them on Friday. On the Mon-
thy the prosecutor claimed the sheep at Smithfield,
and the witness surrendered them to him.
In his cross-examination the witness said he did
not pay the prisoner for the sheep till Monday. The
price he gave was 28 shillings each,
Thomas Henning, a butcher boy, deposed, that on
Friday, the 6th July, he met the prisoner in the Green-
lases, near Hornsey. The prisoner had six sheep
with him, and he employed the witness to drive them
to Smithfield. The witness drove the sheep to Smith-
field, and never saw them again till he saw them in
the possession of the prosecutor at Hendon.
Thomas Austin, a constable, deposed, that he ap-
the prisoner at Winchmore-hill on the
reernecsidat7iy after the sheep were recovered. He went
to the prisoner's house at three o'clock in the morn-
ing, and stated that he came to apprehend the pri-
soner. After waiting some time, and being refused
admittance, he broke the door open. When lie en-
tered the house he saw a per-on sitting in the kitchen
dressed in woman's clothe-. He searched the house for
the prisoner but could not find him. Whilst he was up
stairs, a person, named Wager, who had accompanied
him to the house of the prisoner, called out that he
bad found the prisoner disguised in woman's clothes.
George Wager accompanied the last witness to
apprehend the prisoner. He saw the prisoner come
out of the house dressed in woman's clothes, accom-
panied by his son. He held a pocket-handkerchief
:o his face, and appeared to be crying. The witness
did not know the prisoner at first, and he had pro-
ceeded about .50 yards from the house when the wit-
ness having observed his shoes, ran after him and
brought him back.
The prisoner put in a written defence, in which he I
stated, that on the morning of the 6th of July he
bought nine sheep from a man named Thomas, and
on his road to Smithfield he sold three of the sheep
to a butcher for El 7s. 6d. each. He took the re- ,
wining sheep to Smithfield, and sold them publicly, ,
which, if he had come improperly by then, he would ;
nu have done, as he had long been in the habit of ,
attending Smithfield Market, and was well known
there. He accounted for being disguised in female
apparel by stating, that he was apprehensive of being
seized for debt.
The prisoner called two witnesses, named James
Howe and John Dickson, to prove that they had seen I
Aim bargain for the sheep with the butcher, but their 1
evidence was extremely contradictory. The prisoner I
called five witnesses as to his character, all of whom,
se far as their knowledge went (which appeared ex-
tremely limiteJ), gave him a good one.
Mr. Justice RICHA RDSON summed up the evidence,
end stated his opinion that the prisoner had failed in
establishing a satisfactory defence.
The Jury immediately returned a verdict of Guilty.
After the verdict was pronounced, Mr. ALLEY, the
Counsel for the prosecution, stated that he would pro-
mute the witnesses Howe and Dickson, for perjury.
The prisoner was again indicted for stealing ten
deep, the property of John King, Eq. of Edmonton,
at the 27th of June. There was nothing remarkable
is the circumstances of this case as detailed iii evi-
dences and the Jury found a verdict of Not Guilty.
John Smith was indicted for returning from trans-
portation without lass ful excuse.
Mr. Anottaus stated, that on a former occasion
the prisoner at the bar was tried by a London Jury
for the offence of being at large in London without
lawful excuse, be being at that time under sentence of
transportation. The Jury on that occasion acquitted
him. He now stood charged with being at large in
the county of Middlesex on a'day previous to that oh
which he was before charged with being at large in
the city of London. The prisoner pleaded that the
offence of which he was now accused was the same
for which he had before been tried and acquitted. and
that according to law he ought not to be tried twice
fa the same offence. The Crown denied that this
th the same offence, and this was the issue which
the Jury would have to try. The prisoner, it ap-
peared, had been cor.victed of burglary, and sentenced
10 death, which had been commuted to transporta-
tion for life. The Learned Gentleman then advised
the Jury, in forming their decision, to follow the di-
lution of the Court, as it was in fact merely a ques-
t:sof law.
Several witnesses were then called, who proved
that the prisoner was seen at large in the city of Lon-
de', on the 6th of June, in the second year of the
reign of his present Majesty; and that he was also
seen at large in the county of Middlesex on the 17th
for April antecedent.
LAW, for the defendant, observed, that the
quegton which the Jury had to decide was, whether,
in Paint of law, being at large in one county was the
IThie etenie as being at large in another? The Sta-
te %leder which the prisoner was indicted stater),
that If all person with respect to whom the punish-
ment of death had been commuted to transportation
for life 6hesid at any time be found at large in any
part of Great Britain, without lawful excuse, such
Person should suffer death without benefit of clergy.
ane Act also provided that a prisoner may be tried
ejther in the county in which he was apprehended, or
in that from which he was transported. It was a
Principle of the English law that no man should be
tyke put in jeopardy for the same offence. If the
Jury should decide that the offence with which the
prisoner was now charged was different from that
foe which he had before been indicted, and if this de-
cision of the Jury should receive the sanction of the
dgis, to whom the question would be finally re-
lated, the spirit of that sound principle of law to

which he had al:uded would he controverted. If the
present attempt should succeed, the consequence
would be, that a man, after having been •once ac-
quitted, would be made to run the round of all the
counties until he should be convicted. The first sa-
cred principle of our law, namely, that a man shall
not be-twice put in jeopardy of his life for the same
offence, would, for the first time, be overthrown. It
depended on the result of the present issue whether a
man who had been once acquitted should be dragged
to trial, at the pleasure of any officer who might feel
it his interest to prosecute him ?
Mr. Justice RICIIARDSON then addressed the Jury,
and said, that, as at present advised, it appeared to
him that this was a different charge from the one
which was formerly made against the prisoner. He
did not, however, speak with great confidence on this
point, and it was his intention, should the Jury take
the same view of the case as he did, to refer the ques-
tion to the consideration of the Judges.
The Jury, after a short consultation, declared that
the offence for which the prisoner was indicted, was
the same felony for which he had been before ac-
qoitted. The prisoner was then discharged.
Manasseh Goldstein was indicted for feloniously
forging and counterfeiting diverse Prussi sa notes for
payment of one dollar, purporting to be Treasury
notes of one of the ;Ministers and Officers employed
in the service of the King of Prussia. The prisoner's
age is sixty-two.
Mr. LAW stated, that in some counts the instru-
ment was called an order, and in others an unJer-
taking of the Prussian Monarch or his Minister.
Mr. BOLLAND stated the facts of the case to the
Jury. lie commenced by reading an extract from
an Act pa sed in the 43d of Geo.III. which provides
that any person convicted of forging any promissory
note or bill of exchange, with intent to defraud any
foreign Prince or Minister, shall be liable to trans-
portation for a term not exceeding fourteen years. It
was i r.: material whether the instrument was composed
an the English or a foreign language, or in both to-
gether. In June last year two persons appeared in
the city of Berlin, of the names of Lobb and Simeon,
and were detected in uttering copies of the forged in-
strument which formed the subject of the present in-
dictment. A large number, some thousands, of the
notes were found in their possession. The King of
Prussia, in order to prevent the deterioration of his
currency, considered it necessary to endeavour to dis-
cover the manufacturer of those notes. It having
been intimated that the notes were manufactured in
this country, the King of Prussia commanded the
Director of his Police, Mr. Echard, to proceed to
England with Simeon. On the 10th of July Mr.
Echard arrived in London with Simeon. Simeon was
supplied with money by Mr. Echard, and on different
occasions purchased parcels of forged notes from the
prisoner, amounting altogether to 5000, 6000, or
7000 notes. On the last occasion, when Simeon pur-
chased notes from the prisoner, he met him by ar-
pointivesit .'n the Strand bride. Foy and Clements,
two Police officers, watched Simeon, to whom they
had previously given two £5 notes, to pay for the
forges, notes, and when they saw him give the money
to the prisoner, they ran up anJ seized the latter.—
Foy found the two £5 notes in the prisoner's hand,
who said that he had received them in payment for
some watches which he had sold to Simeon some

time before. Foy asked him whether he had any of
the King of Prussia's notes about him ? he said no ;
and when searched, none were found on him. The
prisoner was then asked it he knew where the forged
plates were? He replied that he did not. Foy, how-
ever, who had been watching the prisoner for some
time, and had frequently observed him go to the
house of Mr. Newman, an engraver, in Widegate-
street, Bishopsgate, took the prisoner thither. Here
the Learned Gentleman observed, that he fully ac-
quitted Mr. Newman of all blame in this transaction.
Toe plate WAS tornposed in a language of which Mr.
Newman was entirely ignorant, and he understood
that it was an admission to a Theatre in Berlin.—
When Foy arrived at Mr. Newman's, he found the
plate at work, which he seized. It; in addition to
the facts which he had already stated, it could be
proved that the prisoner employed Mr. Newman to
engrave the plates from which the forged instruments
were struck off, and that he caused a peculiar species
of paper to be manufactured for the purpose, he
thought the Jury could entertain no doubt of the
prisoner's guilt.
Mr. BOLLAND then called the following evidence :
William Newman deposed, that he was a copper-
plate engraver, living at 27, Widegate-street, Bishops-
gate-street. He knew the prisoner, and had some
communication with him in March or April of the
present year. He had known him personally for
twenty years, but had never done business for him.
When the prisoner called on him in March, he said
he wanted a little business done in engraving. Wit-
ness asked what it was? and the prisoner then sheaved
him a print like one of those in Court, and asked
him whether he could engrave it? Witness replied
yes, and asked what it was? The prisoner replied a
Prussian ticket. Witness asked, what ticket? when
the prisoner replied, a ticket of admission. The wit-
ness saw the word current, which was the only one
he could make out, and was going to ask a question
about it, when the prisoner said, •" GOD bless me, do
you think I am going to give you anything wrong
to do? You know me." Witness replied that he
did. Witness then agreed to engrave the two plates,
and to print 30,000 copies. He wanted them done
in a fortnight. Witness replied that the time was too
short; but that he would print 10,000 in a fortnight.
The job was to be done for about t 3 a thousand.—
The witness pulled proofs, and the prisoner not ap-
proving of the paper, agreed to find his own paper.
Paper was included in the charge of £3 a thousand.
The witness struck off 10,000 copies from the plate
in about a fortnight or three weeks. The prisoner
used to come to the shop and remove the printed
copies from time to time. Three plates were used,
because one was worn out; but only two plates were
necessary to complete the impression. After the
plates were struck off, a line of letter-press was in-
serted in red ink. This was also executed by the
witness, he being a letter-press as well as a copper-
plate
printer. About 7,000 or 8,000 copies were
struck off before one of the plates was worn out.—
The witness told the prisoner that be could not afford
to provide a new plate for the money whichle was
' to receive for tile work. The prisoner then said he
would give him two guineas if be would get a new
plate. The plates were left with the witness. The

-

line of letter-press which was introduced was also in
the original copy furnished by the prisoner. About
August the prisoner told the witness that he had got
a fresh order for 5.000. The prisoner himself brought
the paper cut ready for receiving the impression.—
About 2,000 of the latter order had been done when,
Foy came to the shop. At that time the impressions
were lying about the shop. The prisoner called at
least thirty times during the execution of the two
orders, and appeared very anxious to get the im-
pressions.---The witness identified the plates and im-
pressions from them, and also the original from which
the plates were made.

Cross-examined by Mr. Atennews.—The prisoner
did not say that the impressions were tickets for a
theatre, but tickets of admission. The prisoner did
not ask for proofs to shew to some other person for
approbation. The prisoner took several proofs away.
The prisoner said it was a shipping order.
By a Juror.—The letter-press is formed by an
raiglish type.
By the COURT.—The witness does not understand
either the German or the French language.
William Richard Newman, the son of the last wit-
ness, deposed that he khew the prisoner, and had seen
him at his father's shop on the subject of these instru-
ments (looking at thenotes). He had seen the prisoner
cut Cie edges of the notes when printed.
David Brown, a copper-plate printer, employed
by Mr. Newman, had frequently seen the prisoner
at his master's shop during the execution of the order
for the notes.

Timothy Noland, another !minter employed by
Mr. Newman, stated, that he had seen the prisoner
at his n.aster's shop on one occasion.
Richard Smithermat, foreman to Messrs. Wise
and Co. paper-manufacturers, at Maidstone, proved
that orders were given to make a particular kind of
paper for the prisoner.
Foy, the officer, produced the paper which he
took from Mr. Newman, the engraver, and Mr.
Newman swore to the paper produced being that
which he had from the prisoner. He could not be
mistaken as to the paper.
Smitherman's examination. was then continued.—
In March, the prisoner came to the paper warehouse
at Maidstone, and selected one paper as to the make
of it, and another as to the colour. There s(•ere exe-
cuted for the prisoner 26,000 double sheets. The
prisoner, witness understood, said that the paper was
to be used abroad in lieu of money, by a planter, or
something of that kind.
Crass. examined.—There was another person came
with the prisoner, and they spoke in a foreign lan-
guage. The prisoner seemed to act as an interpreter.
Witness had never seen the person who came with
the prisoner since.

Augustus William Echard was examined by Mr.
Schmidt, an interpreter.—He was inspector of Police
at Berlin, and it was his duty to inspect dollar notes
with a view to know whether they were forgeries or
not. A paper was then put into witnesses hands, and
he stated that it was a false note or receipt for the
payment of one dollar. He had seen a great many
.of them, shewn by Foy, the Officer, to him. In the
month of May last several Jews were arrested at
Berlin on the charge of passing these forged notes.
Jews of the name of Lobb and Simeon were arrested,
the former at Leipsic. Both Lobb and Simeon came
to England, and arrived on the 10th of July. Wit-
ness put a letter intu the Post-Office at Hamburgh
for the prisoner. Witness said the forged note bore
the signature " Altenstein," the Prussian Minister,
These notes were paid by the Treasury at Berlin,l
Konigsberg, and Breslau. The proper appellation of
the Minister was Baron Altenstein, and the name of
the King of Prussia was Frederick William.

Cross-examined.—He had nothing to do with the
Office from whence these papers issued. There was
no one present from the Office ; but witness had
authority and instructions from the Prussian Treasury
respecting these papers. These notes were current
money in the realm. Every one who presented them
could receive money for them, and they were given
at all the Treasuries, both in payment of duties, and
to receive money in return. Witness had seen money
paid an hundred times for these notes, without the
least deduction being made. The notes were current
money throughout the country.
Re-examincd.—Every tradesman in Berlin would
.take these notes instead of money gladly.
By the COURT.—Baron Altenstein was Minister of
Finance at the time those notes were issued, and it
was usual for him to sign them. It was an engraved
fac simile of his hand-writing.
John Schmidt, the interpreter, then looked at the
good note and read it. It was in the German lan-
guage, and was numbered 995,670. It was a Trea-
sury note (or receipt) of one dollar in currency, ac-
cording to the standard of 1764, valid in all dealings
in full, signed " Altenstein." On the other side was
engraved, " Treasury note or receipt, of one dollar
in currency. Office of Realization at Konigsberg."
There was also a crown upon the note, with " F.W.R."
under it, meaning " Frederick William Rex." Wit-
ness then looked at the forged note, and read it: it
was also in the German language. "No.—, Trea-
sury note (or receipt) of one dollar in currency, ac-
cording to the standard of 1764, valid in all dealings
in full. Signed, Altenstein."
Cross-examined.—He should call a promissory note
schuld-skein, and a receipt only shein.
Peter Simeon now lived at 34,Villiers-street,Strand.
—He had known the prisoner nine years, but never
before had dealings with him. He had been in cus-
tody at Berlin. When he arrived in England he saw
the prisoner the following day, and had some con-
versation with him. He told him, "I have been sent
here by Mr. Lobb, to obtain the 5,000 notes, and I
have the money to pay for them." Witness told the
prisoner he had received a letter from Mr. Lobb to
that effect. The prisoner acknowledged receiving
the letter. Witness was present when some former
notes were given to Mr. Lobb by the prisoner. This
was at No. 43, Lant-street, in the Borough. A forged
note was here handed to the witness, and he said the
notes were of that description. The prisoner always
spoke German to him, and the notes in question were,
engraved in that language. When witness asked for
the 5,000 notes for Mr. Lobb, the prisoner said, "I
must have some money beforehand." Witness said
how much? The prisoner answered, " E. 5." Witness
said he would get it for him, and then he went to
Foy, the Officer, who gave him £5, and marked it
first. Witness was always searched by Foy before
be went to the prisoner. He received notes twice

~,.• r -

7.-

from the
—prisoner; the first time 1,200, and-the second
time—WM. An appointment was afterward; made
to pay the prisoner £lO more, and then prisoner was
apprehended at Waterloo-bridge.
Crossezamined.—He had only been once in ass
tody, and that was in Prussia. He was imprisoned
from the 21st of May to the 28th of June. He wai
now upon his parole.
By the Bench.—When the original order was given
by Lobb, he (Lobb) was furnished with a good Prus
sian note.

John Foy, the officer, was next examined. Simeon
was put under his direction. On the 30th of Jul-
he received 1200 notes, which he marked. He took
the prisoner into custody on the Ist of August, on
Waterloo-bridge. On that day witness had given
Simeon two £5 notes, and when the prisoner a as ap-
prehended he had them in his hand. Witness asked
him where he got them ? and he said, " From Mr
Simeon." Witness asked for what purpose? and he
replied, " For some watches I sold him." Witness
told him that he was charged with forging some
Prussian notes. The prisoner denied the fact. Wit-
ness said, " I am certain you have," and asked I
the plates. The prisoner denied all knowledge
them, and witness said, they are at Mr. Newman':
house. Witness added, that he should search New-
man's house. The prisoner then said, "If you de,
you will not find them; but if you will allow me tr
go, I will point out the place where they are to be
found." The prisoner was then taken to the Office,
and witness went to Mr. Newman's house. There he
found two men pulling off impressions from twt.
plates, which ssitness took possession of, and marked
Nos. 1 and 2. There was also a type, with some red
ink upon it. Witness produced the two £5 notes
which he found on the prisoner. Witness had marked
them before he had given them to Simeon.
Cross-examined.—He was not near enough to Si-
meon to hear what passed between him and the pri-
soner when the two £5 notes were given.
Thomas Clements, another police-officer. He knew
a person of the name of Simeon. Witness went wit'
him to the house of the prisoner, at Shadwell High-
street ; but did not go in. Simeon was searched be-
fore lie went in, and had no notes upon him. When
he returned he had a parcel of notes with him, which
were given to Foy, the officer. Witness never lust
sight of Simeon. This was on Monday, July 30.
The nest day Simeon went again to the prisoner's
house, and brought out a second parcel of notes,
which were also given to Foy. Witness assisted
apprehending the prisoner, and also in the search
Mr. Newman s house.

Cross-esarained.—He saw Simeon go into the pri-
soner's house, but was not near enough to hear am
conversation between them.

Charles Christmas, a police-officer, proved that he
saw the prisoner go into Newman's house twice
July last.

A bundle of the forged notes was then proved
be false Prussian receipts, by the witness Augustus
William Echard.

Mr. BOLLAND here closed the case on the part ,
the prosecution.
Mr. PLATT, as Counsel for the prisoner, main.
tained that the instrument in question, which the psi.
soner was charged to have forged, was not properly
called in the indictment, for it was not a promissory
note, or undertaking for the payment of money, nor
an order for the payment of money. The document
did not bear upon the face of it the name of any per.
son who was compelled to pay the money.
Mr. BOLLAND, in reply, contended that the 43d
the King was intended to include foreign securities,
and that by the language of the note itself it would
be seen to be an " undertaking for the payment -
money," and the words, " Office of Realization at Ko-
nig sberg," plainly shewed it.
Mr. Justice Ilictraanson overruled the objection.
The prisoner was then called upon for his defence.
The pt ironer then addressed the Court.—" All
have got to say is, that I have done it from distress
alone. Gentlemen, I have a wife and seven helpless
children, and I did this to give them the bread which
I had no other means of obtaining. I assure yon,
Gentlemen, I did not know there was any harm
what I did. I asked Mr. Lobli whether there lips
any illegality in the transaction, and Mr. Lobb Fut
his hand upon his heart (the prisoner described the
manner), and said,' Upon my honour and soul there
is no illegality in the transaction: This is all that
know, Gentlemen."

A great many witnesses, chiefly neighbours of the
prisoner's, were called to give him a character. They
declared him to be an upright, honest man.
Mr. Justice RICHARDSON summed up the evidence
with great perspicuity, and particularly called the
attention of the Jury to the conversation which passed
between Foy the officer and the prisoner, when ar
prehended. The question was, whether the prisoner
could have made these notes with an innocent design?
Witnesses to character had been called, but their ev7
dence would not weigh against clear facts, proved
good testimony.
The Jury, with very little deliberation, found
verdict—Guilty.
The prisoner was then removed from the dock.--
He did not seem to be much affected when the
verdict was pronounced. The Court was crowded
during the trial, and many of the Jewish persuasion
were anxious spectators.

GENTLIMAN IN MACK !—Dining the reign of the celebrated
pickpocket Ilarringtors, an alarm was one night raised in the boa-
lobby of Covent-Carden Theatre, that he was in the house. The
news spread from box to box like electricity. One gentleman
had lost a snuff-box, another his watch, une lady her purse, ano-
ther her smelling-bottle; in fact, everybody had ion, or raid
they had lost something. Behit.d Mrs. J—s, the sitter of the late
Earl of C , sat a gentkenut in black, who, with much
liteness, communicated to her this most dreadful intelligence ,
" The villain," said she, whipping a splendid pair of brilliant
ear-rings out of her ears, and putting them carefully into her
pocket-book, " shan't have my ear-tiugs, I promise him !".
When the Play was over, adjourned to the reed
my Lady D--. Upon entering the drawing.noom, she new
,
bee dear, dear friend," and, after embracing her with transport,
told her Ladyship what an escape she, had had of that " horrid
villain Barrington," felicitating herself that only for her amazing
ingenuity and cleverness she must certainly have lost her drops.
As she could now with perfect safety hang out her gems, she
thrust her hand into her pocket ; but, after a coke or two, ,
changed colour and started—" Us has them, said she, in
army. " Impossible," said her sympathetic friend, " intra.
dDk !" Alas! it was too true. After the most santittous rum-
mage, they were nowhere to be found. Upon diligent I=
it appeared that the very Gentleman in block, who had so
cautioned Mrs. acabut Barrington, was Barrington MO-
self. As soon as the Lady bad deposited bee brilliants in b-
packet, that able staid skilfully extracted theta I