The Dewsbury Chronicle, and West Riding Advertiser. — 1873-08-09 (Dewsbury, West Yorkshire, England)

FORGERY OF A BILL OF EXCHANGE AT HUDDERSFIELD. Wm. Henry Shaw, 42, manufacturing chemist, was indicted for forging an acceptance of a bill of exchange for the payment of £33 18s., with intent to defraud John Ogden, at Huddersfield, on the 13th March last. Mr. Tindal Atkinson was for the prosecution; the prisoner was defended by Mr. V. Blackburn. On the 13th March, prosecutor met the prisoner and a man named Whittell at the Globe Inn, Huddersfield, and Whittell said the prisoner wished to get a bill discounted by the prosecutor. Prosecutor remarked that he should like to see the bill, and on its being handed over to him he observed that it purported to be accepted by a Mr. J. T. Howarth. Prosecutor thereupon said he would take the bill across to his bankers—the Huddersfield Banking Company—and enquire of them if they knew anything about the said Mr. Howarth. Prosecutor's bankers told him that Mr. Howarth banked with the Midland Banking Company, but they sent over a note to the Midland Bank, and the result of the communication that passed between the two banks was that the prosecutor went back to the prisoner, saying the bill was all right. They went back to the Globe Inn in company, and there and then prosecutor drew a cheque for the amount of the bill, and handed it over to the prisoner, who told him that the consideration of the bill was his supplying Howarth with a quantity of liquors. On the 31st March prosecutor being in want of some ready cash, went over to the Midland Banking Company, and asked them to discount the bill he had obtained from the prisoner. Prosecutor was kept waiting in the bank for some little time, and then..he was informed that the Midland Banking Company declined to discount the acceptance in question, without assigning any reason for adopting that course of conduct. Nothing more occurred until the sth of May, when prosecutor again sent the bill to the Midland Bank, by a man named Priestley, and then the manager informed Priestley that the bill was a forgery. Since then Howarth had altogether repudiated the acceptance in question; hence the present proceedings.—Evidence in support of the above facts was given by the prosecutor.—J. T. Howarth was then called, and proved he was met by Ogden and asked about the bill. He replied that he knew nothing at all about it, and characterised it as a forgery. He afterwards met Shaw and asked him what he had been doing with his name, and he replied "Nothing." Witness subsequently met Shaw again, and accused him of using his name without permission, prisoner replied "G— d— him; has he told you all about it? But never mind; I shall meet the bill; it is done every day." Howarth said "It won't do for me; I don't do business in that way.--Witness was then subjected to a searching cross-examination, but his evidence was not in the least shaken.—Sergeant T. Whelan, of the Huddersfield Constabulary, proved apprehending the prisoner, and reading the charge to him. Prisoner answered " It's a lie." Witness also searched him, and found a pocket-book in his possession, wherein was an entry dated 13th March: "Received from J. T. Howarth, £33 18s., three months, payable at William Deacon and Co.'s, bankers, London, due June 16."—Mr. Blackburn, for the prisoner, did not offer any defence, saying he was satisfied to leave the matter in the hands of the Court.—The jury found the prisoner guilty, and his lordship deferred judgment until the following morning.— Mr. Atkinson stated that there was another charge against the prisoner, but as he had been found guilty the prosecution would not press it. A WORKMAN MURDEROUSLY ASSAULTING A