The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-01-28 00:00:00

GTBSONS V. MARL.

In the month of June,lB2o, Mr. James Mart, torn
merchant in Leith, sent a sum of money to the Commer-
cial Bank's branch there, among which was a one
pound note of the Bank of England, which was re-
fused, as being a forgery. Mr. Marr, thereupon made
inquiries at the Bank respecting it, and found, that the
note in question had been presented at the same Bank,
by Messrs. Thomas and Robert tlibsoos, merchants in
Leith, the pursuers in this action; that its number and
value were entered into their cheque-book of' forged
notes; and that the teller of the bank hid marked on the
hack of the note itself the date of its being
.presented
(I ith May, 1820) by the pursuers, adding his initials.—
Mr. Marr consequently adplied to these gentlemen for
payment of the value of the note, which bad thus been
traced to them, but which they refused. Ile therefore
brought an action before the Justices of the Peace of
the county, to recover the money. The Justices, how-
ever, on the 10th ofJuly following, dismissed the action,
as incompetent for them to decide upon, and recommend-
ed Mr.Marr,to apply to the Sheriff orguilge Ordinary of
the bounds. Immediately after this, the Messrs. Gib-
sons brought an action against Mr. Marr for defaming
their character, in accusing them of uttering a forged
note, knowing it to have been forged, a crime which the
law visits with capital punishment, and concluding fur
5000/. damages.
The following are the issues, which were this day
submitted to a Jury to try the cause :-
Ist. Whether, in the month of June, 1820, or about
that time, in the town of Leith, or upon Leith Walk
leading to Edinburgh, and in presence and hearing of
James Fred. Donovan, some time before superintendent
of Police in Leitli, and of Timothy Lane, cn• reliant in
Leith, or one or other of the said persons, the defender
dill falsely and injuriously say that the pursuers hail
i•isueil a forged Bank of England note, knowing the
saute to he forged, which note had come into the de-
fender's possession; or did use or utter words to that
effect, to the injury and damage of the said pursuers
2d. Whether, on or about the 10th day of July 1820,
at a Court held at Edinburgh, by the Justices of Peace
for the county of Edinburgh and in presence and hear-
ing of James Gibsons, Esq. and Wan. M•Farlane, Esq.
justices of peace for the said county,and in presence and
hearing Oa number of persons then and there assembled,
the defender did falsely, maliciously, and injuriously
say, that the pursuers hail issued as genuine,
a forged note of the Bank of Encland of the valise of
one pound, after the pursuers hail been informed that
the said note was forged ; or did use or utter words to
that elect, to the itillry and damage of the pursuers:
Or,
31. Whether the defender did apply to the said James
Frederick Donovan as an oth,:er, or is, having kern an
ollieer of police, with a view to recovery of payment of
the aforesaid forged note; and whether tile defender bad
geed probable cause in stating to him that the purifiers
had issued, or caused to he issued, the said forged note,
kuouig the same to have been forged:
4th. Whether, at the pleading before-the Justices of
Peace for the vounty of Edinburgh aforesaid, the de-
fender bad irood probable cause for stating that the
pursuers had issued, or caused to b- issueJ, the said
tweed note, merited No. 11,243, after they had been
infertned by the Commercial Bank that the said note
was forged.?
•

- •

•._