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

GUILDHALL. Mr. Joshua Freeman, one of the inspectors of forged notes at the Bsnk of England, attended before Mr. Alderman Gibbs, on summons fur detaining a sheet of paper b longing to Mr. Alfred Mortimer Job, a stationer, in Bread-street. Mr. C. Freshfield, one of the sslicitors to the bank,appeered on behalf of the defend Int. Mr. Job said he complained of the detention of a sheet of paper manfsetured by him, an 1 bearing the name of Dupont and Cu. in the water mark. Mr. Freeman took it from him a month ago at the Beek of England. He called on complainant and inquired about some paper he had made for Mr. Thorntor, the same gentleman that committed suicide in a station-house a short time since. Witness told him he thought he had preserved (me sheet of it for his register of specimens, but of course he could not part with that. He found the sheet arid 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 tradtsman, 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 forge d banknote. At his lodgings were found a plate anti implements for preparing forged notes, and it was discovered that Mr. Job had manufactured the paper for him. The paper had the curved or waving bar in the watermark precisely like the Bank of England notes, and by one of the Acta for preventing the crime of forgery, it was Enacted that no person should manufacture paper with a curved or waving bar watermark, en pain of ' transportation for 14 years. The way in which Mr. Job met the inquiry indaced the bank to believe he had offended inadvertently, and no proct-edine was take. against him, though the mischief he had enabled Thornton to commit whs enormous. Ile had manufactured for him paper for 10,000 notes, which might have been filled up as 100/. or 1,000/. notes, and circuleted in India and Europe. The paper had fortunately been seized at Alexandria on its way to Cairo, where Tnornton had an establishment. If Mr. Job flattered himself that I e 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. lie warned Mr. Job that he would be treated as a felon if he 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 iu 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 ioeal note of a wavy pattern like a Bank of England note. Mr. Freshfield said he was nut aware of any such infringement of the law. Mr. Alderinan Gums inquired for the section of the Act to which Mr. Freshfickt had referred. Mr. Freshfield handed to him the 11th George IV., cap.' 66, sec. 13, 14. Mr. Alderman Gums 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 eircumstaects fer any one bat 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 urea by manufacturers of spurious gold celar. Mr. Job said this was mentioned to prejudice him as a respectable tradesman. They were used by his fati,er, and he had a right to have them, for they were simply implements to be used in gilding, a mere battery. Mr. Alderman GIBES 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 Glans again recommended him not to pi:trilemteshssrsd.ofuor i jieotibot. respect, st ahied, then directors d na a ot tt all events a ket rveeeatnhtt es respectable ehecotaparebbdi arbitrary w at tradesmen cue olsi nul irebs nee as they had with him. Mr. Freshfield (laughieg) said no doubt the director: would take the lecture from his hands. 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 s centre piece exactly the size of a bank note, and leaving a watermark of curved ur waving lilies exactly resembling the bank note.