The Statesman.
London, England, 1822-10-24 00:00:00

GENERAL QUARTER SESSIONS AT KNARES-
BOROIifiIL •

A enniber of vagrants having been disposed of by being
ruased to their respective settletnents, motions of coarse
tore heard, and the court then proceeded to hear and
determine appeals,which exclusively referred to paupers,
removed from one township to another. The only case
at hick :,resented any thing like novelty, was an appeal
1 y the township of Dewesbury against that of Myer-
thotp, for the removal of some pauper children. It was
contended on the part of Ste the appellants, that three
of the children, though born in wedlock, were illegiti-
mate, on account of the supposed non-access of the hat-
band, who wise non-commissioned officer in the Guards.
The husband, however, did not seem to be of an impla-
cable nature, and made no complaint of this increase to
Lis family, bat resumed at the end of the war, his ma.•
trimonita connection with his faithless ritt,and was living
with her at the present moment on terms of the greatest
amity. It was •distinguishing feature in this case.that
the wife was examined to prove her own infamy, which
she did with very little apparent reluctance. The Court
affirmed the order of removal.
The only case of felony which differed from the
ordinary course, was that of Mary Ann Waterhouse,
who was charged with stealing a bill of exchange, the
property of M . North and Co. of Wakefield, wool-
staplers. The prisoner,it appeared, was domestic see-
vaot to one of the partners, and contrived, hi some
means or other, to abstract a Bill, of the value o 421.45.
front a drawer in the counting-house. It may be proper
to state, that the Bill was specially indorsed to Messrs.
North and Co., and bad not been Indorsed by them at •
the time it was lost. The Bill was first tendered for
discouut at Messrs. Leathanas' Bank, who refused to dis-
count it on account of the special indorsement to Messrs.
North and Co. having been obliterated. The prisoner,
however, prevailed upon a tof M . Young
and Beckett's to write the name of Geo. North upon the
Lill. It is right, however, to state, that he gave infor-
mation of the circumstances to his maater, which led to
the apprehension of the prisoner. Another individual
lobe prevailed upon to sign the name of Jno. Wilkinson,
and a third that if her father, John Waterhouse ; she
then procured cash for it at Messrs. Wentworths' Bank;
t•bont 201. of which she paid to a Mrs. Richardson, as a
deposit fur her board for a year, during which time she
Was to learn the dress-making basiLess with her. daugh-
ter. The prisoner, on her apprelteosion„ stated that i.he
had found the bill on the shop floor, and detailed the
steps she had taken to procure cash for it : and also the
manner in which she had disposed ofit. The Jury found
the prisoner Guilty. The prosecutors expressed a wish
that the Gotta would pass as lenient a sentence upon her
as the circumstances of the case would admit; and in
c ns deration of this recommendation, the Court only sen-
tenced her to be imprisoned sin months.
There was also a similar prosecution against another
female • nt for robbing her mistress ; the articles
stolen were of inconsiderable value; and the charge not
being brought holtie against the prisoner by satisfactory
evidence, the Jury found a verdict of Not Guilty, which
PO roused the Ire of the prosecutrix, who was in the wit-
ness box, that she exclaimed, with great vehemence,
" That is a scandalous shame."

..~~

OLD BAILEY SESSIONS.

Postnaay.—John Belk:nisi Brooke, a bill-hroftet, WM
indicted for forging a receipt of 151. 10s. with latest la
defraud Wm. Clarke.
Mr. A LLLT (with whom was Mr. Avotaencts and Me.
CCRWOOD,) appeared on the part of the Crown. • '
• Mr. Sergeaut Plet-La Mr. BOLLAND, and Mr. Purr.
appeared for the prisoner.
Mr. Hill, a Solicitor of Chancery-lane, stated that be
was the Attorney for the Prosecutor. In June last, an
simian was broUght by the prosecutor against the pti-
-loner, in the Court of Common Pleas, to recover a side
•of money. At the the, a check for WI. wasiresleteed.'
• as the part of the prisoner, et at *
r~l~~.araa—awaandorseurent—briolaselfii: s amountil4.4llllltogir
sawr , ; under these the prosecutor's name- was 'writ-
ten, and the hard-writing was 'hedged to be his ; these
*yarn being a receipt for so much cash received, the
receipt was given in evidence as a set-off against the
plaintiffs demand. In answer to this, the plaintiff pro-
ileced a debtor and creditor account between the par-
ties, furnished by Brooks, by which B. brongbt himselfiti
debt to Clarke 131. ss. but took no credit for the receipt
alluded to for 15/. 101. Clarke denied haviag ever given
the receipt, and asserted it to be a forgery; and the
Jury, going upon Brooks's own account fnrnished for-
merly, gave a verdict against him for the 131.55. Some
few days after a Judge's summons was obtained in a
cause of Brooks v. Clarke (the parties baring brought
cross-actions), calling on Mr. Brooks to show cattle why
Le should not produce the cheque. Mr. Breaks, Mr.
Isaacsoti (his attorney), and the witness (Hill) attended,
after Several summonses had been issue ; and when the
pa riles *were before Mr. Justice Best, Isaacson was asked,
on producing a copy of the cheque. what bad become of
the original ? upon which be said it was then bettors
Counsel for legal purposes ; bat be afterwards admitted
that it hail been given to Mr. Brooks, who, in his turn,
being asked by bis Lordship to produce it, replied, "that
'Le- felt himself in a very serious• situation, and that hM
Lad taken able advice on the subject, and following that
a taiga, he had destroyed it." Nothing further was duns
'dope, and shortly afterwards a warrant was issued against
'tl a prisoner, and he was apprehended and accused ed
*..sing forged the receipt."
Cross-examined by Mr. Sergeant Pgt.L.—He nevi
k••etv Brooks till since the action between him and
Clarke bad been commenced. Since the trial in June last,
Brooks had made use of some wouls,'referring to him,
Lich he thought were very harsh, and such as be did
not deserve, and which had much irritated witness. He
had himself expressed words knitting he would bring
Brooks to a pnblic trial. On the tttal of Clarke's action
against Brooks, he was examined as a witness against
Brooks, hut he did not know that during the time of Ws
e; vitt z evidence, Brooks hail objected to etas not being
fonnded in truth. In consequence of what he stated on
the trial, he had been abused in the public streets, and
mobs raised about him. He had also been threatened
with legal proceedings. The original cheqne was banded
about the Court, but he did not know what became of
it after the trial. The action brought by Brooks against
Clarke is still pending. but Brooks told air,anatice Best
that he meant to discontinue it. The amount of wit-
ness'; bill of costs, up to the tnid.lle of Jane, amounted
p aliaps, to 100/., anti he had received 1401. from the
parties. Up to this limo his bill might be 1001. more
clan he held cash.
• Ste-examined.—The verdict was given for the amount
that Brooks made hi:list-I:a debtor to Claike for.
tyliam Donald stated, that lie sold goods upon aom-
' ru..stun ; kneW Salmon the flow-s•reet officer. Salmon
pnrchased a horse of him, and gave a Bill for 15/. 10s.
and the remainder of the money in cash. He was at
that rime acquainted with Clarke, a publican, and ap-
plied to him to get the hill discounted. Tory went to-
gether to the prisoner's house, in Broatheourt, Bow-
el:re?. Brooks iikcounied the bill, and gave Clarke a
ci.etane (the one in question), for 111/. and the remainder
in cash. Clarice gave him the cheque and the cash, less
.254. which he kept for his trouble. Ile could nut say
whether there was any name or figures on the back when
lie received it ; but Clarke did nut write any upon it in
bis'preeence.
tieorge Ward, a hatter, in Clare-street, Clare-market,
proved that the prisoner called upon him with the
chequo., on the day before lie appeared before Mr.Jits-
lice Best, when began it into witucss'e Lanais, and asked

• t

e- ...`,