The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1853-06-16

amount
Of letter of credit for &a10to 45,2lO wac brought
before Alderman Wire, for final examination, bv
Thain, of the detective city police.
Mr.. Mullens. Of the firm of Bush and Muiiens.
solicitors to the committee Of bankers, appeared
for the prosecution; and Mr.. Wontner for the pri-
soner.
Mr.. Muiens said it waz his intention to close
the case by calling Russian merchant whose
house had been defrauded to considerable extent
by means of the forged document and by the
prisoner
Mr.. James Murray Wilson said :: / am mer-
chant, carrying on business at St. Petersburg un-
der the firm of Wilson and Company. We are
the correspondents mentioned in the letters OF
dit of Duncan, Sherman and Co., of New York.
On the 2lst of February last their letter of credit
No. Ill was brought to me by the prisoner. 1t pur-
ported to be for f5,2l0 On that day paid to
the prisoner the equivalent in Russian money OF
E10O sterling. He then signed the two bills pro.
duced for Gao and ECO upon the Union Bank of
London, both dated the 2lst of February, and
signed by him in my presence, "Gabriel Sans
Garratt,' and both purporting to be drawn on the
Union Bank of London, account of Duncan,
Sherman and Co.'s letter of credit No. Al. On the
22d of February the prisoner called upon me
again, and said that he required further sum of
E2,500, and it was to pay for some diamonds
which he had bought / was TO pay the amount
from whom he eaid he had obtained the diamonds,
and if any balance remained was to pay that over
10 himself He called again the next day, but on
the same day he came again on the Change, and
requested me to provide sum equivalent to E. 200
sterling more, to be paid in the came way upon
his ORDER In consequence of that request be gave
me the two bills-namey, one for f2, 500, dated
the 22d of February, and drawn the other bills
on the same letter of credit saw him sign these
bills; the other is for Ell 200, and drawn in the
mo In eofr {La-o
bills paid the three draughts produced signed by
the prisoner The amounts of the bills were marked
off upon the letter of credit, and / returned the
letter of credit with these endorsements in it to the
prisoner. The draughts were paid to the prisoners
order, but before be left 1 made calculation of
the amount which would be coming to the prisoner
after payment of his draughts on us. There as
small balance of about 25s., which paid to the
prisoner. then transmitted the bills by post to
our London house, in whose favor they are drawn.
The balance was paid to the prisoner before the
checks were presented, but be had told me the
amounts of the checks he to draw. There
were previous endorsements the letter of credit,
one of which of the Union Bank of London,
and another of Shicker Brothers, of Berlin, and
third of Marc & Co., of Moscow. made note
account on slip of paper, stating the exchange
and the amount he would have to receive.
Cross examined by Mr.. Wontner-I did not
keep copy of the letter OF credit.
Re-examined by Mr. Mullens.-1t is not usual
to keep copy. We should have detained the
letter of credit if the amount had been exhausted
Alderman Wire asked whether MIR. Wontner
desired to make any further observations in the
case?
Mr.. Wontner said, the only point to which his
| attention had been directed was, as to the legal
effect of the documents having been presented in
London by an innocent agent, whether his act
could be binding, in criminal sense, upon the
prisoner for transaction in which he was imph
Gated abroad out of the jurisdiction of the British
courts. He had looked into the cases, and not any
1F& 49, oI.oo sI.L
case. The alluded to bad reference to limo.
cent parties who had been deputed to do
lawful act for the benefit of those who had EN-
ployed them agents. In the present the
transaction was completed abroad, and the fact of
the check being presented in London act
done for the benefit of the holder of the bill, and
could not have been presented in London for the
benefit of the prisoner. The prisoner had COM
United no unlawful act, either by himself, or
structively by any innocent agent, in England.
What he did done out of the jurisdiction of the
English courts; and therefore the prisoner
entitled to his dis, barge.
Alderman Wire Suppose this had been a case
Of forgery of the letter of credit and there
evidence to chow whether the alteration had been
made in this country or abroad?
Mr.. Wontner. There is no evidence to the effect
that the alteration has been made in England.
The only evidence is that the document has been
uttered abroad Giving a forged English bill
abroad would not give jurisdiction to the courts in
England, although it might have passed through
the hands of several endOrsers.
Alderman Wire. Suppose that this were civil
transaction the endorser of the bill would be the
agent for the drawer to present it. In my opinion
the agency in this case lie implied by law. Suppose
person at Boulogne gives to the captain of yes
sci forged check, payable and to be received in
London, would not that be a criminal offence for
hich he might be amenable in the English courts?
In the case before me il never intended that
the money should be received at Berlin or Moscow,
but in London, and consider that there was such
q continuity in the acts of the prisoner to bring
this case within the jurisdiction of the English
courts
MIR. Mullens. In the case in which evidence has
been given to day the bill given by the prs-
oner to Messrs Wilson & Co., at st. Petersburg,
for the purpose of being presented to The Union
Bank in London
Alderman Wire. This is a of SO much inn
portance to the banking and mercantile commu.
nifty that consider it to be my duty to commit the
prisoner for trial; but as there may be some doubt
as to the law applicable to it. although there can
be no doubt whatever as to the fraud committed
by the prisoner, will consent to take bail for him,
himself in f500, and two sureties in $3.50 each.
The prisoner was then formally committed for a
misdemsanor, in having fraudulently attempted
to obtain the moneys in question from the Union
Bank of London with intent to defraud that estab-
lishment.