The Sun. — 1846-10-12 (London, England)

GUILDHALL. Mr. Joshua Freeman, one of the inspectors of forged notes at the Bank of England, attended before Mr. Alderman Gibbs, on summons for detaining a sheet of paper belonging to Mr. Alfred Mortimer Job, a stationer, in Bread-street. Mr. C. Freshfield, one of the solicitors to the bank, appeared on behalf of the defendant. Mr. Job said he complained of the detention of a sheet of paper manfactured by him, and bearing the name of Dupont and Co. in the water mark. Mr. Freeman took it from him a month ago at the Bank of England. He called on complainant and inquired about some paper he had made for Mr. Thornton, the same gentleman that committed suicide in a station-house a short time since. Witness told him he thought he had preserved ORO sheet of it for his register of specimens, but of course he could not part with that. He found the sheet and took it to the bank to show Mr. Freeman, who seemed to want to keep it. Witness told him he could not part with it, but he delivered it to him to show to the governor. After keeping him waiting for a long time he returned, and said he intended to detain it. Complainant said this was a very arbitrary proceeding towards a respectable tradesman, and insisted that his property should be returned to him. After some discussion, Mr. Freeman promised to return it by noon that day. He, however, did not do so, and witness was obliged to take this course, upon principle, to show that even the bank could not be suffered to treat people in an arbitrary manner, Mr. Freshfield replied that the circumstances of the case were rather extraordinary. A man named Thornton destroyed himself a short time since while in custody, charged with having possession of a forged bAtanote. At his lodgings were found - ' Tawas Sfla implements for preparing foro‘-' that Mr. Job I,^' , _..41 manufactured the paper for him. notes, and discovered The .1)31": nad the curved or waving bar in the wateron inner of pt iheoc is el Actsy likeforthe)r u wBo gofthEon crimeglan d onotes, by it was enacted that no person should manufacture paper with a curved or waving bar watermark, on pain of trusportitieh for 14 forgery, and years. The way FOicialx•  Job met the inquiry induced the banik to believe he had (attended inadvertently, and no proceeding was taken against him, though the mischief he had enabled Thornton to commit was enormous. He had manufactured for him paper for 10,000 notes, which might have been filled up as 1001. or 1,000/. notes, and circulated in India and Europe. The paper had fortunately been seized at Alexandria on its way to Cairo, where Thornton had an establishment. If Mr. Job flattered himself that he might lawfully have possession of paper on which he could fabricate false notes, he was mistaken. It was declared to be a felonious act to make such a water mark or to have such a sheet of paper in possession. He warned Mr. Job that he would be treated as a felon if ho were found offending again. Mr. Job said the Act which Mr. Freshfield referred to only related to the making of paper to be used in England, but he had a perfect right to make paper in any fashion for exportation, to be used by banks in foreign countries. The Act could not be so stringent as to making water marks of curved lines, or as to having possession of paper so marked, for many of the country banks printed their notes on such paper. It was a common thing to find the water mark of a local note of a wavy pattern like a Bank of England note. Mr. Freshfield said he was not aware of any such infringement of the law. Mr. Alderman GIBBS inquired for the section of the Act to which Mr. Freshfield had referred. Mr. Freshfield handed to him the 11th George IV., cap. 66, sec. 13, 14. Mr. Alderman GIBES read it, and said Mr. Job was certainly mistaken. There were no words of limitation in favour of paper made to be used abroad. It was unlawful under any eircumstances for any one but the Bank of England to make paper like theirs in respect to curved or waving watermark lines. He gave the Act to Mr. Job to see if he could discover any exception that would avail him. Mr. Job and a friend turned over the statute for a few moments, till Mr. Freshfield said he would make him a present of that copy, that he might look at it carefully. He took this opportunity of recommending him to get rid of an instrument which had been seen in his house, and which was used by manufacturers of spurious gold ceins. Mr. Job said this was mentioned to prejudice him as a respectable tradesman. They were used by his father, and he had a right to have them, for they were simply implements to be used in gilding, a mere battery. Mr. Alderman GIBBS recommended Mr. Job to withdraw his complaint. If he asked for a decision another magistrate must be called in, for one magistrate could not determine on the complaint. Mr. Job at first said he would have a decision. Mr. Alderman GIBBS again recommended him not to press for it. Mr. Job said, then at all events he hoped it would be a lesson to the directors to treat respectable tradesmen with due respect, and not take the same arbitrary course as they had with him. Mr. Freshfield (laughing) said no doubt the directors would take the lecture from his bands. The bank, therefore, retained the sheet of paper in issue. It was produced in Court. It was larger than a bank note, and had a border of watermark all round, the words " Dupont and Co." appearing at the top and bottom, and " Egypt" on each side ; but a distinct water line showed where this border might be cut off, leaving a centre piece exactly the size of a bank note, and leaving a watermark of curved or waving lines exactly resembling the bank note.