The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1838-08-17 00:00:00

charged with having committed a forgery. The indictment
set forth, that the prisOner had forged an acceptance to de-
fraud Joseph Hughes, and Edward Grundy, of the sum of
£l6 15s. 10d., and of uttering the same, knowing it to be
forged. There was another count charging him with having
uttering a genuine receipt for £ll ss. 10d., so as to make it
appear to be for £l6 15s. 10d. This, the council for the
prosecution said was the substantive offence.

Mr. Brandt and Mr. Cross for the prosecution, and Dr.
Brown and Mr. L. Peel for the defence.

The prisoner, it appeared, was the paid overseer of the
parish of Rivington for ten years. In 1830-31, Mr. Edmund
Grundy was high constable for the hundred of Bolton and
Middleton. Mr. Grundy was partner in the firm of Grundy
and Woods, bankers, of Bury. John Shaw, who acted as a
writer for the township of Rivington, in 1830-31, proved that
he had entered the accounts of the township in the town
ledger, from the prisoner's dictation. The amount entered.
as money rolls was £75 2s. - (The ledger was produced.)
March was the usual period for examining and passing the
accounts. The accounts were cast up by a schoolmaster.
They were then submitted to the town meeting and passed.
The vouchers were not produced regularly, nor were the ac-
counts at all examined by them. The balance in favour of
the prisoner was IA 10s. 21d. Edward llothwell, an assistant
overseer, proved that on the 3d of May last he demanded the
books and papers of the prisoner, and received amongst
them the money warrant produced. Joseph Hughes, who
was, in 1831, a clerk in the bank of Messrs. Grundy and
Woods, said it was the' nrisoner's duty at that time to pay

money in pursuance of the money lolls. The amount iu
question was handed to the witness. Ile gave that receipt
on the 6th July, 1831, fur Ell ss. 10d. The receipt had been
altered by turning the one into a figure of six, And by placing
a figure of one before the five in the shillings' place. The
total amount required for the township of Rivington, while
Mr. Grundy was high constable, was £56 [Us. 641. The
money was received and entered as the banking account of
the high constable. The duplicate money warrants were
produced by Mr. Woodcock, attorney, of Bury. Fle had not
made out bott► the originals and the duplicates. The total
to be cAlected under the warrant in question was £llss. 10d.
Among the items in the above warrant, there appeared one
of £5 13s. 2d., fur the proportion of tile chairman's salary.
This, it was proved, had been, in reality, only 13s. 2d. A
Mr. Anderton staled his belief that the figure of five
placed in the pounds' column was in the hand-writing of the
prisoner.
Tbe learned JUDGE Stated it as his opinion that there was
not sufficient evidence of forgery, though he thought the
fraud was made out in the handing over the receipt as a
voucher, as it would make. Mr. Grundy liable fur the
difference.

The Jury proved the prisoner guilty ofultering knowingly,
with the intention of fraud.

Witnesses were called to prove that the prisoner had pos-
sessed a good character, and a document to the like effect
was handed in.

The pi isoner was sentenced to one year's imprisonment
and hard labour in Lancaster Castle.

HAVING POSSESSION OF BASE COIN, WITH INTENT TO UTTER

[Valium Rodgers was placed at the bar, in company
with Mrs. Large, the latter having been convicted during
the present assizes of having been possessed of a mould for
coining, of which the prisoner Large was acquitted. The
present indictment charged Rodgers with having had base
eoi n in his possession, with intent In utter.
The Attorney-General for the County Palatine and Ml'.
Armstrong conducted the prosecution, and Mr. Knowles ap•
peared for the defence. .

It appeared that on Wednesday, the 6th of June last,
the two prisoners were on Kersal Moor, at the Manchester
races. A dispute occurred respecting a bad shilling which
the prisoner and Large were said to have passed. Mr. Dig-
gtes, deputy constable of Salford, and Andrews, an officer of
the Alanch,ster police, were present. They took the prison-
ers into custody, and on searching them they found on Large
18 counterfeit shillings, and on Rodgers two counterfeit slid-
lings,a nd no good money at all.
Mr. KNowLes addressed the jury on behalf of the prisoner
The act of parliament set forth that the person must be
found possessed of three or more pieces of counterfeit coin.
To make this Out, it was presumed on the
part of the prosecu-
tion that the possession of Large was a joint possession with
Rodgers. This point his Lordship said he should reserve.
The jury found the prisoner guilty. His Lordship de-
ferred passing sentence.

ING.
Robert Wilson, aged 26, was charged with having, at Man-
chester, feloniously made and counterfeited a shilling and a
sixpence.
Mr. Sergeant Alcherlcy, and Mr. Armstrong for the prose-
cution, and Mr. Wilkins for the defence.
A person who was employed by the conndttee for incorpo-
rating the town of Manchester, was calling at certain houses
in Allum street, fur the purpose of testing the genuineness
of the opponents signatures to a petition. As he passed
along the street he saw through the window of the residence
of the prisoner that the latter was engaged in pouring metal
into a mould. He entered the house, and saw the prisoner
breaking a mould under his foot on the floor. A base shil-
ling, a sixpence, a farthing, and a medal, all cast from one
mould, and still attached by the new tnetal, he found on the
floor. Ile asked the prisoner'What'he was doing, he replied
tie was out of work, and was trying his hand at that game!
The clerk gave information to the police, who went to the
prisoner's house at night, and found sonic plaster of Paris,
and the shilling, sixpence, farthing and medal, which had
served as patterns fur the counterfeits. The prisoner did
not go to the house. while the officers were there. They
found the prisoner at another house iu bed.
The jury found the prisoner guilty, and he received sen-
tence of six months' imprisonment in Kirkdale Gaol.

SELLING COUNTERFEIT COIN.
Sarah Shackletun, aged 52, was charged with having at
Manchester unlawfully uttered and put off to John Wilde a
counterfeit sovereign and a counterfeit shilling for a lower
rate than the samedid by their denominations import.
The Attorney-General and Mr. Armstrong for the prose-
cution, and Air. L. Peel for the defence.

I t.,apioeit red that a person named Wilde had been employed
by tho4oliee of Manchester in May last, to go and make
acquainiance with the prisoner. He went to his house and
said he had been recommended by a person named Hough-
ton, whom the prisoner knew. lie made acquaintance with
the prisoner, who introduced him to a person named Davies.
These between them sold him certain base coins, imitations
of sovereigns, half-sovereigns, and shillings. Davis had pre-
viously pleaded guilty during the present assizes.
A half-sovereign was produced which had been struck with
a die. It was yellower in appearance, and not su heavy, as
a good half-sovereign.
The jury found the prisoner guilty.
The prisoner, with Davies, who had pleaded guilty, was
sentenced to one years imprisonment and bard labour at
Kirkdale gaol.