The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1859-03-17
Court OF General Sessions,
Before Judge Russell

Deiore Judge kusseu.
THE AUSTRIAN FORGERY CAsE-RoHNER CONVICTED.
AS soon as the court opened yesterday the City
Judge proceeded to charge the jury the case Of Henry
Rohner, indicted for forgery. His Honor commenced by
observing that the defendant charged with forgery in
the second degree, in having his certain
counterfeit notes Of the National Bank Austria valued
at SAG 81 currency. To constitute the offence of for
gerry three facts must copspre and must be proved by
the prosecution to warrant the jury in convcng the p
soner First, the possession notes. secondly
the knowledge of their being counterfeit and thirdly the
intent utter and deraud The first point establish
ed by the evidence OF Deputy Superintendent Carpenter
who that the 18th or 18th Of November trunk
brought TO the Office; and also by the testimony OF
Mr. Knot, and his wife, who deposed that the prisoner
boarded in their houee in Orchard street. that he had
trunk, and that the officers took the same trunk
10 the police headquarters where II opened and
these counterfeit bills and papers discovered great deal
bad been said by the counsel for the defence relative
70 the propriety Of excluding the admissions and
tons Of the prisoner because improper Inducements had
been held out 10 him. He (he Judge) could discover
IN any OF the declarations made that any inducements had
been held out to the accused whereby confession had
been extored from him. but, the contrary the cst-
mony showed that the statements voluntarily made.
IL was well settled rule OF law that any influence
brought 10 operate on the mind prsoncr or on tae
mind OF person who was under arrest whereby con.
fession exorted should be excluded by the Court
The next question for the jury TO determine the
cener, guilty knowledge The mere fact of person
having counterfeit Dill in bis possession unless he had
it with intent to utter IL ami deraud no offence
The guilty knowledge could be proven IN variety o
ways The Indictment avcrred in the four counts fou-
distinct bills, and all the prosecution had to do was 3,
prove that the bills found the possession Of
fendant and prove that at the time other
money of the character was found In his pos
session. AS TO the third proposltion-lhc intent /,
utter and defand There principle OF law 70 govern
cases OF this kind. IL person has large quantity OF
counterfeit money in his possession, the law required
MIN 70 account for his possession Of IT, aud his failure 70
do 80 would be evidence that he had with guilty intent
70 utter and defraud 1t unnecessary his Honor said
Tor nam 10 go ever the testimony in the case, all
IN nutsnel, and was similar TO the ordinary OF
forgery disposed OF at each o. the Court After CIT
ing the law governing the case, the Judge conclusion
ead that they were sole judges Of facts and that
they had reasonable doubt the property of the
defendant.
Counsel for the defence then presented tbrtvtwo nro
positions Of law which he desired Court 70 charge the
majority of which Judge Russell refused 10 charge az thew
were inappcable 10 the case Counsel excepted 10 every
portion OF his Honors charge before the Jury retired ~
their ROOM They absent only fifteen minutes when
they returned with q verdict OF guilty.
The prisoner was remanded for sentence until his con-
federates tried.
Charles Edwards was tried charge Of passing coun
tereit money, but the evidence insufficient TO war
conviction, and the jury rendered formal verdict
OF not guilty.
There was large number Of the calendar bat
the witnesses failing to appear the Court adjourned early
u the afternoon.