Cambridge Sessions, Monda...
The Times, 1824-01-15T00:00:00

tBefore tAie RECOR.DER.1 Le uourt-house was crowded to excess at an early hour, and members of the University were to be seen in all parts of it, in con-, sequence of a long standing and serious accusation against one of the students of Trinity College. Upon the be .ch sat several of the Fel- lo5s of the University, and other men of the highest respectability in the county. The case cxcited the deepest interest, on account of its novelty, as connected with a student ot Cambridge, and the respect- ability of the family of the accused. James Suckl was indicted, tor that he, not minding to get his liv- ing by truth, but being evil-disposed, and devising how he might ob- tain possession of the goods of others, for his unthrit'y livine did send a letter. or cause a letter to be sent, in the name of Win. henrv Ord, which letter was false and fabricated, to Wim; Newby, of Can;- bridge, for four volumes of Heyne's Virgil. To this indictment the defendant pleaded "not guilty." There was another indictment, charging the prisoner, in the same form, with having sent a false and fabricated letter, in the name of Thomas liord ttav, to William Warreker,' of Cambridgc, for a dozen pair of black silk stockings, a quantity of shirts, silk gloves, &c. To this intlictmnent he also pleaded " not guilty." The defendant waspermitted to sit at the table, next to his counsel and solicitor. AIlr.PiIIUE conducted the prosecution. The defendant, he said. was a student of the Inner Temple, and was lately a member of Trinity College. The jury must, doubtless, hear with astonishment that a young man in such a station of life, and so respectably con- nected, wvas indicted for tse offience which had been iust particular- ized, This circumstance would probably be alluded to in the de. fence, and used as an argument against the probability of guilt; but it should be considered that men were only rich in proportion to theiirpower of making their expenses subservient to their ability, I t n to5 v - seie5,ich stated. that he w'LS arich man who laid-by more than heexpended. It would be proved that the defendant had avaied himsself of the knowledge wvhLch his academical intercourse with some gentlemen of the University gave him, and that he adopted a course which disgraced himself, and re- flected discredit unon the University. The indictment was founded upon two acts of Pailiament, the 33d of HIenry VIlI., which en. acted, that if any one obtained goods by colour of fulse pretence, or counterfeit letter, he should be punished by fine or imprisonment; and the 30th of Geo. I I., which extended the offence to any false re- presentation whatever. There were several counts which the learned counsel enumerated, but which it is wholly unnecessary to notice here. IMr. Newby, the prosecutor on the first indictment, was, he said, a bookseller, and had had some dealirgs with the defendant. On the 31st of July he received a letter to the following efrect.:_ Isle of Wight. "Mr. Newby-Sir,-Be so good is to send me iinmediately a copy of Ieyene's Virgil, four volumes large paper, if you have it; also an editiojn of Horacm. I ami in the Isle of *Vight with my tutor, and shall be moving about constantly. I have a parcel omin from the Bull Inn, Aldgate, on Friday, and will thank yoa to send the books directed there in the safetZ coach, till caUed for, so a,s to reach the inn in time to be forwarded to me. I am your obedient servant, " Trinity College." " W. H. ORD." Now Mr. Ord ahould be produced, to prove that he neither had wrettenihe letter nor sanctioned -the witing of it. Upon receiving it-, Dlr. Nevlby m-adtrio crpe toprepare theboolnt; but not being supplicd witLh Eome of them, he was induced to apply to another bookseller for an accommodation, usual amongst the trade, and he then ascertained that this letter was not a solitary instance of the liberty taken with a name; for another letter had arrived from the slpe of Wight, giving an order in a different name for books, and there is strong reason to suspect that the subscribed names of the gentlemen had been forged, and by the same person. Here Mr. HIUiST, counael for the prisoner, objected to the state- ment of MIr. Prime, observing tbat he was speaking positively of what he could not prove in evidence. The RECORnDE sad lie was bound to give counsel credit for what they said. They knew the rules of evidence, and he trusted that the latitude would be exercised as discreetly as possible. Mr. PuiaxE continued.-Mr. Newby, nstwitlistanding the doubt existing in his mind, executed the order. He, however? sent a per- son to watch his supposed correspondent, and determined, if any fraud was meditated, that proper steps should be taken to detect the offender. An officer was forthwith. despatched to London, with directions to apprehend any person or persons who should call for the parcel directed to Mr. Ord, and the parcel was sent off to the Bull at Aldgate. As was expected, a person called for the parcel in due time, received it, paid the carriage upon it, and in walking away was apprehended by the Cambridge constable, under such dr- cutmstaibces as proved Ihis guilt, for he betrayed symptoms of confu- sion, and had upon himn a slip of piaper which contained memo- randa, foniniig a cUle to the whole plan of itiposition upon the Cambridgeslsopkeepers. It was necdless to say, tbat theper,son ap- Vrehendetl was no other than the prisoner. The learned Counsel re- grettcd that two letters to other shopkeepeis had unfortunately becsi burnt, and so much evidence of course put out of the way; but the evidence upon the case hc had just submitted would, he thought, be considered quite conclusive. It would, however, give him satisfaction, if thie d7efend unt should succeed in conv ncing the jury of his innocence, and fixing the offence upon another person -a course which it was said Mlr. Su^h intended to adopt, by argu- ing that he had applied for the parcel at the request of a professional frend, and thus became an iunocent and unsuspecting object of supicion. Several witnesses were exanmined in proof of the indictment. After which IMY. LHuT rose forthe defendant. Hesaid thathis object irn ad- dressing the Court was to point out the legal grounds upon which the prosectUtor was put comXpletely out of court. His client intended, if there existed anv necessity forna defence, to enter at length upon the vindication of bIis character; but the legal objections wihic pre. sentedthemselves to the further cntertainment of the charge were so great, that as a lawyer, and of course bound to take ad- vantage of every defect, he must, notwithstanding the reluct- anccof r.l. Sueb, clam an acquittal for him on the mere strength of those objections. In the first place, this case did npt come within the statute; in the next, the prosecutor had put himself out of court by proving that he was not deceived by the pretence; and lastly, the fraud attributed to the defendant was not within the jurisdiction ofthe Court, tile possession hawving been obtained in. the city of London. It was to be wished that the subtilty which had so comprehensively drawn up the indictment, for great ' udg- ment had been exercised on the occasion, had confined itself to civil cases, and not borne down against one in the situation of the defendant, whom he beleved to be a most amiable and inno- cett young man. Now, as to Mr. Newby?s being deceived, bow did that appear? When that gentleman received the letter, ie fins- pected that it was not from Ir. Ord. He received c6iofinrston up- on consuating with his neighbours, and still be seut the books Here was a palpable varianee between the indictment and the evidence; for the one said that Mr. Newby was deceived, and the other said that he was not, but on the contrary that he was quite convinced ot the deception. Tbe act of Parliament waslnade for-the protection of simple unsuspectipg men; not for ni-enr who like Alr. Newby, were protected by their own caution, aDd whio, iiHc him, would be disposed to convert a letter which was not calcuhali to d%ceivie hiiu into a man-trap. The goods were all the while in sIir possession, or under his control, and lfr. Ord, of whose ris ectability there could not be theslighest question, was liable to he bpprehended, as ell as any lbedy else, according to the very broad Vud coul eben- siVe directions Of a personwho had takensuch god cam of Isself as to-beindifferent to the feelings of. thoEe around lim. 'He had ihe mnesas of detecting, alld he did detgce;.and knowing that there wasan intentios to defraud, he sent the goods. He was 'therefore out ofthe meaning of the statute, for he wasa person notdeccived. The learned counsel here argued upon the words of the letter, which he faid or. rdered alargeletcer.Virpilor nopee A,srsnU letter Virogi had b0en unt- *1T'he ordier, therciorc-was not complied with.. .iw it.pesdsi be that It a man psked for a horse asnd was sent a cow, it could be argued that biu order hal been complied with P (Loud laughter.). The 5ma11 letWr, QI 0t she60w,wa lt of theo gr'~ ownsiorlahzn afalsepret-ene, f9rbes`0nt fo biitTflw -IWhy,A111-.Newbt m"Iht ~-suda sundred-volumes upon -an_ot46,;7fbr one,_ if, Ruth &46ctrme, w_ere to be admittea, and, charge the isito'-to whom bje shoinAlAendi Ie:ther with the debt or the o%fne. , hehius to thi.t,ejnue: the gWOd Were car~tainly obtained In Aldgate, in thte city or London. Here, tlhen, it *as palpable that the receiviing, which wats the corpuis deficti, took place outerf the jurisdiction or the Court. The learnea counsel then cited authoritiea to provLb the claimn of his client to ac- quittal. The Prosecutor's possession of the goods had, lie said, never been given up. The parcel was constrdctively inbhispossession, for he had sent an officer with directons to take uip any one who should apl or it. To deal otherwise with the sitatute thsrn as he (Mlr. Hun) hd jstlaid down, would be to turn it into cunning, and he ther-etore caluled upon the Coiurt to declare that his client was nowv, as hie had been all along, coram nont Jndie. Dir. PueseEE commenced a reply to those arguments by some ob. -stervations upon the appeal made to the passions of the Jury ; but MUr. -Hunt requested that he would touch the law of the case, and stick to that. mr. E.-Why, Ar. Hunt, I do as you do. PIN -Copy my virtues, not mny defects, my friend. Touch the law. Mr. PRIME: submitted to the Court, that the guilty intention was the only thing necessary to be established, in order-to shiow the propriety of prosecuting under the sttute on which this indictment was founded. So much for the first objection. With respect to the second-.if a man were to send, in the namie of another, for a coat mnade of Saxon wool, aind that the tailor, not having wool of tt'at kindl, sent a coat made of another sort, wouldI the crime of the chest be less amenable to the law ? The third objection was answeredI as easily as the two firstL The possession of the books was obtained the moment they were sent to the booking-office, aad of course the vcrnue was correctly laid. The RxcoRnxst concurred in Dilr. Prime's view of the objections, and accordingly over-.ruled therm. Air. HiUNT then said he should leave the case in the hands of the defendant, who was preparing for the profession of which he would onedy be an ornament. Th eendant, who sat at the table, next to his Counsel, then rose. The timne of trial to which he hadl looked for the last six mnonths with so much atnxiety had at length arrived, aTnd deeply painful as- his anticipations had been, thev fell far short of the pre- sent overwhelming feelings ofbhis heart. ffe stood there charged with an offnce against society which lie revered, against a God at whose name he trembled, andl whose worship he adored-h,e stoor3 charged as a commnon robber. A member of a family whose respectability was acknowledged by all, whose good name had never been tainted_a memIber ot'a university, upon thec good opinion and support of which al hs opes in life depended-..he could not but feel in his present codiio an agony beyond deanair, if he had not wit',in his breast a conscience free from olTenre, ind a dependence upon the wisdom of those who were to deride between him and his enemies. But the uy,even the jury, came into court loaded wgith prejudices againist MT Tht itcould be otherwise was impossible; innumerable were.the insinuations made throughLthe towni in ;which he was to he tried, ag-ainst his character, and every new edition was more ag- gravated and inflamed ; but he knew that those preiudice and those suspicions wouild all fly off before the great tribunal at -which he s'tood for the vindication of his fame; and that the reports which he was obliged to notice, although no attempt'lad been made to establish their truth, would not be gufferedI to interfere withi the judgment of the twelve men who were to decide upon his fate. All that the tongue of malice could utter or invent against him, had been spoken ; but how feeble had the venom piroved itself to be,when the specific whicli grew up in a Britisth court of justice was applied ! ILook at the support which the declaration, so publicly bellowed through the streets of Cambridge, that he was the occupier of two lodgings in London, received! The clamour wag adopted because there was something auspicious in the idea of keeping twRo lodg- ings ; and yet there was no ground for the rumour, except, indeed, the suspicion of a police offlceri,wbo heard it said by some other per- son, and thercfbre thouglht there could be no doubt of the fact, It had been denied, too,that lie was astudent of the Inner Temple, and he was charged with presuimption in asserting that he was. But this, like all the other sndignant attackus, was false, and he had it in his power to show it by the production of his certificate, whiceh he for- tun,ately, had not been deprived of. Those and a hundred other false reports had been long floating thtrough the atmnosphere of Cabrid ge, and must have drifted into the-ears of the jury, and he should niak-e no other excuse for alluding to circum-stances which he was aware could have no effect upon their minds iii their calculations upon his guilt or innocence. Credulity, and prejudice the child of credulity, were'the native inhabitants 6~ the mind. TLo guard against their influence was a task of no ordihary dlifficulty; and what individual was fortified against the constant, the incessant reiteradtio of charges which went to gratify the mischievous pro-. pensity ofinankcind? It was asaying of Edmund Burke's,that the samne thing repeatted dailv for twelve months, would at the end of that period be believed t1y the inventor. Six months had all those stories, to his (the d-efendant's_ injury,been in claily circulation ; and arguing from the data of the p?wosphica politician, a corrseponding degree of credit might have been given to the accusation ; so that the minds of his opponents mnust naturally be expected to have acquired a sharper tone of animosity by the pernicious habit to which he had found it necessary to allu e. It was true he had the books in his pos- session-it wvas true he had the elip of paper in his possession ; s far the aPpearances miilitated against him, but this possession had no- thing'todo with a falepretence.Not one word of evidence hasbeen adduce in proof otf that mnost indispensable material in a chargbe of fraudl. A link waLs wanting in the chain, and the'aecusation ipso farto fell to the ground. '1'he intention of the accused was as free from evil as were the thouglhts of those whom he now addressed, and happy would he have been liad his counsel listened tohis suggestions, and scornedato press any legal point, content to let him stand or faLll by the unvarnished representation of the real facts. It was, indeed, a source of great satisfaction to him that the learned Recorder had over-ruled the objections whictt had been advanced for such a sub- terfueasn app'lication to errors in leo r' ritings or statements as agrud of acquittal, was only fit for thte guim .Teewsahri iicece, as well as a heroic courage; he felt the latter in all its vigur,andto hetrtaby ury-, -which must be-esled -the palla. dium of British liberty, so lonjg as it remained Incorruptible either by passion or avarice, he would rather submit his !case thAn appear to be under an obligation to maistake or inaccuracy for the result of the trial. He disdained all attempts to wind round the feelings of those who were engaged in the solemn and importatnt inVestigation of the truth. Hedisadasned to make an effort to harrow .up their feel- ings by showing to them how inseparably interwoven his, des- tinies were with tie fate of others who were much dearer to him than life : but he wvould emphatically importune the great Searcher of hearts to enable them to see their way with a purevio. There were no windows in the breast of man. Would to God that they could behold th.epenietralia of his bosqmn. They would ack-now. ledge that the taint ofthis mean and despicable vice wasniot to be found there. That the books were meant to beobtisined frauidulentlv, he had nG hesitation in btlieving ; but that he became posses sed oif them in a just and honoumable manner, he would convince the jury that there was as little doubt;, and he hoped they would demand the miost undeniable proof that he was the writer of the letter, be- fore they considered him guilty. Hle then said, that observing thle impatience of' the jiury ea ihear his defence, he slhould proceed without more delay to give them a detail, to the truth of every word of which he pledged himuself before the ftce of Almighty God. During his residence in Cambridge, he was in the habit of riding to Newmarket, where lie occasionally laid 'wser with pei:sona of whom he had no previous knowledge, and he believed h~e was not singular in that respect. Upon one ocasion he iaida a.wager of 101. with a Alir. Hales, upon a race-hiorse, and won; and Air. Hales gv him his card; called upon hima atAlrs. Perry' shouse,where hel:Z7ed and p aidhini: herercommenced anauitne which the defend- ant should never cease to decplorae. Hetogtta r. Hales, whose appearance, and address:, andacca lienswr l corres- ponding, and of the very first order,waamebroth University, for he spoke'of several noblemen and gentlemen with anai of perfect famniliarity. Another bet was made between. them; Dir. Hales wagercd fou-r to six against Ernlus', at Epsom races. He (defend- ant) was to have maet Dir. Hales at Epsom Downs, but the Uni- versity duties interfered, and he was obliged to absent himself. Hie lost the wager, and soon after saw Air. Hales at Vauxhall-gardens ; there he apologized for not paying the debt of honiour, requested that his creditor would say nothing about it, and in-vited him to chambers. The acquaintance wasthiusgradually ripening, andADie. Hales's elegance of manners atnd accomplishments appeared to greater advantage upon closer acquaintance. Suchi, in fact, was the ower o thD is very elegant person, the defendant declared, that he shudhvilcd n actually liad placed, thermost unbound. ed confidence in him. During the subsequent- interviews, Mlr. Hales showed the same fascinating deportment, "At last," said the defendant, "1he was obliged to go to Brighton ; he cease to mne and told tue so, and wishied me to accompany) him. I was obligedl to remain' in town to attend terms, and consequently refused, but I offere,d to render him any serice in mypoedungm st. Indeed, said he, I am very- thankful to vou, and you can do a littld commission for mec. I have, addeid he, 'been commissioned by M4r. Ord, Ailr. Hennitch, and Lord Hay, to have- some parcels whichi the3 expected in Londorn froin Cat bridge, tr-1psu)itted to them. .1 Isail, at once, to accommodate him, tliatI would attend to the bu~si- nees; he thanked me,~ and said, that the, Kentlcmen to whom he was to send tie parcels were in the Isle ol' Wight ; but, said he, I don't know any thing about the Itle ofWllight, I am qute a stranger to it; liowever, I shall on my, return. do all thait is necesary, if you will be so obliging as to got the parcels, which are to be directed to the E~ Inn, ijsto your possession, and keep thiemi in a corner of your bed-room. I consented-to do so, andl to pay whatever charge might he made ; and, Gentlemoen of the Jury, '.the very heatl and front of my offence bath tbhvex. utet, no more.' I. did not think- it necesiary' to send a porter for the rarcels, for I c-alculated thiat lie must be paid halir.acrown for the errand from the BaullInn to Adam-street in the Adelphi, and a coach wouild not cost me mlore : I, theriefore, having nothing to do, walked to the Ituh, applied for the parcel withiout fear or hesitation. obtained it, and was walking down&1!yO steRn (p call a pxteh, when thieofficer laid hold ofiimc. That otlier and his c6nipanion- have said just as muchi as woald servec the prosecution, and 'no miore. They have forgotten what I said, and to answer their own par- pe,. they failsely stated that 1 had murmiured. Whlat I saia. I sasdudiatin tly-and i rmlsy: I said I'know my name is not Ordl, and thatI would tak-ecare oftlie parcc. It is faLseto say that I 'was flurried. The officer told mie it was necessary I should ep to Cam- bridge. Whrlat was my conduceton the whole occaion~ 14ef any human being, except those who look to future -advantage to themr. selves, to say that it wa-s not the conducts,fan inno~ent man. Ihit in a specia pleader's office, tie atr pand gqhdeet r4le'is, nes'vre to-p,ut a questiem to a witness whiich willnot answ&irliepurposas ofthepro. secutioin; and this rule has bcefi adhered to by the counsel for the prosecution. I reppat, before the face of, Almighty- God, th~at my cenduct was that of an innocent man;- that my conduct is5 'that of an innocent man, who has been imposed uipon by a vmiai. This is the plain ' unvarnished tale' of the whole sjie Of .misfortune. - The samse account I have always given, and the samie I shiall give at thle judgment-seat of Christ." The defend. ant sa(d he shul now prto'ced to the second -part of his-e- fence; and be addressed _himoelf in thFp most solemn. Tlpa4nnr to the reason and judgment of the jury, ps . svell as to their in " 'foUowing him through all thi parts oftfeh-greattogicof hisvgnnLil]tio. liesupp~lica~te-that he mightmnotVie;hurr t a pre-judg ed executi?on,anslthjrthey woald caitthe eye. of'philosophy uipon wlathehto del?y~j. Itbad'beeni agreed to by all writers,that reasn alone miade iisa #ceuntable forhiis actions.' If that-Was the case -would not a verdict of lunacy be brought'in aLainst him,b- foea verdict of fraud, if he bad acte uii was dZ'scribtd:? What could be (lie isiotive fo'oftie commission of the crime ? HIcmnust have hath seine end in view.-either the pleature of'reading- the books-lie was ccued f hvin obtained fraudulently, or a profit from the gale of them.tHe would-first show-that the siotive was not hthp leak- pure of.redin'g Visji1 bhe wd,,uld provein evldefice that he bad an extenilive library; t ith had five eitfions of tha very book zlended ~ Isuthe as lember of the British Mluseum, wherether 'were undres ediions, and thathbesd-othenneunenofgrair a ft~rau P2rgil wi6thotendatige$nhghlsreputation'. .P P8 no qf'? Rijorc mlopio "aom Wbr f;Ud f'Q, tile Q;soat ifitclearlypresipposed poverty. ?hii Yasthe piutni tion whlch was so general In Cambridge. The magistrates who lived and acted i so.philosorbical a place knew that every efFect must have a C2s be nmost charitable'vay they had to accountfortheoffencewas bYAttributing It to indigence, and the accordingly set him down as robbing for bread. Heg did not consider poverty a disgrace, except when it was the known consequence of a bad course of life. It wan a state however, of which, whether it wa praiseworEhy or ignomi- nious, ie had never had an opportunity of estimating the meriea. IlW. French, if be was in Court, could prove that he notonly had enough for himself but 591. or 601, to lend to a friend, and that be had taken up bills iately to the amount of between 801. and 901. It would be proved that his father always paid the University and other bils on thedays they becamedue; that he had himself been always sttdious, sober, and economical; that he was seldom out afler five o'lock in the evening, and never after nine ; that he had a cellar full of the best wines, and an excellent library; and that he was in a state of affluence,and was a man of most punctilious hornour. It had been said that hundreds of pounds would not'have satisfied his desire of expense. To a man so insatiable, of what service could forty shillngs' worth of books be-how could he turn a paltry rob. bery to the gratificatlon of his passion ? He would prove that his credit at Cambridge was good-that, upon application to any shop- keeper there, he would not have been refused, and that even lIr. 'Warreker, one of the witnesses for the prosecution, allowed that he was to be depended upon; for after the charge had been made, that gentleman begged to be allow,ed to send him twenty pounds' worth of goods. f\1r. li'arreker was here, and he had it in his power to deny it if he could_ Wr. Warrelker.-lt is not trine. The defendant proceeded wi:hout the least hesitation. ne had, he said, plenty of witnesses to prove that Mlr. Wllarreker had niade the request. rhe case was wvholly 'without support, end persons in the Courts above knew it, for it had not onlv been submitted to gentle- men of eminence at the bar, but to a Judge, and they expressed their surprise of charging a man who could command 401. at any thne, with a robbery of 40s. The REcotnDER_r.r cannot, defendant, permit that to be said of a Judge, when it is impossible the case could have come before him. The defendant asked, whether it was not reasonable to supposue that if he wanted moneyhe would part with his chronometer, for which he could have riot eighty-five guineas in an instant, rather than have to send to Cambridge for 40s. worth of books to supply his necessities ? Books might not be a very marketable commo. dity, but the prosecutor had said that he would have given books upon his (defendant's) credit. This must be allowed to be a solecismEthat a person who had the opportunities of obtaining considerable credit vwitout hazard, should risk his character, nay, his life (for this case might have been prosecuted capitally), by making a base experiment unon the name of another. Let the jury look at the case as they would, they would see no m.ore than this-that he formed acquaintances with greater speed than dis. cretion; and the only point in dzbio was, whether he was not the dupe of a villain. He was a very young man, but little versed in any arts but those of schools and collegds ; and was it miraculous that he should be deceived, when those whom he addressed were constantly th-e victims of imposition ? He declared, that as he hoped fpo sal- vation he was cruelly and unjustly punished; that he complained not of prosecutors or magistrates, who were carried away by the torrent of suspicion; and that whatever might be his fate, even though the verdict should hurry his dying mother to the grave, he sbould offer to God the effusion of a soul as resigned as it was inno- cent. If the jury believed him to be guilty, after such positive as- surances of innocence, they must believe him also to be the most perjured and in nitous of God's creatures, wvho would be content to destroy his soul through all eternity, upon condition of escaping from a trivial punishment. He begged the jury to reflect vpon the consequences of an unfavourable verdict te him and his family, and to prove by their decision that, he would not be induced to ruin the hopes of his brothers, wvho were all younger than himself, and to be- come the digito rnonstrari of every passet by; that he would not by an act of baseness subject himself to banishment from his friends, a homeless living monumeaRt of blighted ambition and detected vil- lainy. He wanted not such an acquittal as would be calculated to throw the least shadow upon his innocence; sooner would he rush into the presence of his God. The acquittal he wanted was that which would restore him to confidence and fdicity, the reward of his innocence and the test of his truth. [At the conclusion of this speech there were some expressiorns of admiration, but they were checked by the Recorder.] The defendant's counsel then called the following witnesses*- MIr. John Spicer, of Bedfordsh*re.-I knew ir. Such sincehe was a child; he lis spent several weeks at my house at a time. He has visited me within 12 months. I am very intimate with his father. In mv opinion he was a most upright young man ; I would not have believed it when I heard he was indicted; I supplied him with mo- ney, frequently; his father desired that I should supply him, and never withdrevr the order. Cross.exainined._I have seen him two days within the last twelve months; he has not aplplied to me for several years, but I was al- ways open ts him. wsr. RendalL_I. keep a boarding house ; Mlr. Such lived in my house for some months; his deportment was that of a gentleman ; I do not think him capable of a swindling transaction: when be was taken up he was lodging with me. Thomas Spicer, draper, of Sheffielda-I knew Mlr. Such 12 or 14 years; I have visited himn, and he has visited me; lie has been at my house three weees together; I should not believe him capable of aswindling transaction, and wiiU not believe it; he could not have been in poverty, and I should have given him credit or money if he;wshed;Ihav seen anumber of broks of his at his fathers house; 100 or more. Mr. Smith.-Mr. Sueh lodged at my aunt's, and had some things from the :shop; I gavehim credit; I should not have suzpected his character; I saw nothing particularly wrong in him as a ledger. TIrs. Perry.-Mr. Such lodged with me two terms; he always behaved well at my house l thought him a little gav, but I did not think lhim capable of any thing dishonest; I would hnave trusted'bim anvthing. hlr. James Phillips, boot and shoe-maker.-I have had deal- ings with Mlr. Such, and consider him incapable of a swindling transaction. Cross-examined._-I never heard any thing disrespectful of Alr. Such, and always considered bim respectable. Mr. John Carter, grocer.-I know Mr. Such; he dealt with me thrte terms; we look to the tutor to pay; I should not have imagined him capable of a swindling transaction. Mr. Lamb a saddler.-Mr. such always behaved wel to me,and I should not have thought it likely that he would act badly. A horse-dealer gave evidence to the same effect. lr. Crisp, confectioner, was dealt with by Mr. Such, and had no reason to doubt his honour. Cross-examined.-Exeept in one instance, I believe bim never to have actel badly; and I still think him incapable of a swindling transaction. Another witness stated, that, until the 31st of July, he thouglit mlr. Such incapable of an improper act. Mr. Randall Jaclson, of Christ's College_I am a student of Christ's College. and knowv MIr. Such, but not at all intimatelv. I have had transaetions with him in small debts, and he alwais be- haved to me honoarably. MIr. Gaywood, a horse.dealer..Ihavehad dealings with Mr.Such. I thimtt him incapable of swindling. John Brown, Esq., a tutor of Trinity CoDege.-Alr. Such is ms upil He was in eneralatlectures, and extremely weUprepared I Cad often been esired by the Dean to admonish gentemen for neglect of chapel dutv, butiever had eccasion to do so to him. lie never, while with me, did any thing to induce me to think that he would engage in a swindling transaction. Cross-examined.-He ceased to be a member in August. So long as ilr. Such attended my lectures, and was under my superintend- ence, he did not act reprehensibly. I have my doubts whether be is or is not incapable of a swindling traiisaction. I feel doubtful about his being incapable of committing a fraudulent act. Re.examired.-I did not think him capable of a pecuniary fraud until this transaction. Mir. Pitzstm expressed an anxiety to reply, and argued strongly for the right. The RECOILDFsn.-I decide, meo perculo, that no reply ought to be made upon this case. The RECORDEn then summed up the evidence. He observed, that the case was of vast importance to the public, who should, upon all occasions, be informed that no station, however hih, could ext empt a guilty person from the operation of the law. it ;was also of paramount importance to the defendant, for the verdict aest eithier restore him to society or consign him to infam y and disgrace w-okse than death, In the appeal made hy the defendant to the feehi6s of the jury, they were to consider that, powerful as it was, iteonsisted of mere assertions, unsupported by evidence. The Jury retired, an d in two hours returned a verdict of Guilty. The defendant seemed to be quite overcome at hearin&h3is doom;. he hid his face between his hands and sobbed. The REcoRDERt then addressed him, and said the evidence bh been such as to leave no doubt-cf his guilt in the tninds Qf any wiho beard it. The sentence of the Court was then passed vFon the defendant. Imprisonment for two years. The def&ndantdocs not appear to hemore than 18 or 19 yeegs of age. The trial ladted 1. hours, and the- c6urt and pa3saiges were crowded up to the moment the sentence was passed. C4AIBRIDGB SESSIONS, Mfonday, Jan. 12. CIIARGE OF SWJNDLING AGAINST A STUDENT OF TltE UNIVERSITY.