and desired him to advance him 4507. upon the credit of that note; that seeing a promissory note made payable to Samuel Edwards, esq. and indorsed by the said Samuel Edwards, esq. this appeared to him sufficient security to lend 450l. upon; that he did thereupon comply with the request of the defendant, Mr. William Hales, to advance him that sum; that he drew a draught for it on Caswal and Mount, who were his goldsmiths for this sum, which draught he took up afterwards, and allowed in his settling of his accounts with his goldsmiths; that at that time when the defendant brought this note to him, this very note was delivered to him, with this very indorsement that is now upon it, for ye "Pray pay to the Order of value received observes, always wrote himself the whole superscription, his master refused to do this; and therefore these covers remained without franking: Mr. Edwards would not accommodate the defendant, Mr. Hales, in that manner with his hand, and leave the rest blank for another person to fill up as he thought fit. This was very prudently done; Mr. Edwards, who is a gentleman in business, might well apprehend that an opportunity might be hereby given to serve purposes that it might not be in his power to controul. This, gentlemen, is made use of as proof of an attempt by the defendant, to get such sort of franks into his power to make use of to such a purpose as this. The next witness that they called is Anne Clarke, who saith that she is likewise a servant to Mr. Edwards, and she produceth a note written by Mr. Hales, and saith, that this was brought to the house of Mr. Edwards, with a desire to have some franks directed to each of those persons, two to each of these three several persons: She saith, that it was some time last summer, she thinks about July. She saith, that when her master, Mr. Edwards, came home, she shewed it to him: and Mr. Edwards declined giving or accommodating Mr. Hales with franks to these persons. The reason that he gave was this: Mr. Hales (said he) hath both a brother and a nephew that are members of the House of Commons; and therefore he need not send to me for franks, when he may have them from his own relations; he therefore declined it at that time. These were the directions: Two to Mr. Levett of Huntingdon, two to John Pratt, esq. at Bristol, two to Stephen Mitford, esq. at Bristol. Gentlemen, to corroborate this evidence that this note came from the defendant Mr. Hales, Mr. Booth is called. He is asked, whether he is well acquainted with the hand-writing of the defendant Mr. Hales? He saith that he is, and that he verily believes that this note is his hand-writing. It hath been observed by Mr. Attorney, that there seems to have been some design, the form wherein it is wrote being very proper to give an opportunity for an alteration; that each of these directions is very short, and would take up at most but one line on the superscription or outside of the cover; that there would have been a considerable space left, so that when Free, Samuel Edwards, was wrote, there would have been a sufficient space of paper to write a note or any thing over it. This is the observation that hath been made upon this note of directions. After this they produce Mr. Robert Harle, who is secretary to the million bank, to witness to the particular fact. He saith, that this note was on the 13th of June last brought and delivered to him by the defendant Mr. William Hales. He saith, that he was then at Baker's coffee-house in Exchange-alley; that the defendant, Mr. Hales, came to him, and produced this very note of 800%. payable to Samuel Edwards, esq. within three months, subscribed Robert Hales, and indorsed in the name of Samuel Edwards, SAMUEL EDWARDS." He saith, that he is sure that it was thus indorsed when it was left with him, he being desired to lend the money on a note so indorsed; that it hath been in his custody ever since, so that he is sure there hath been no alteration made thereon since that it was delivered unto him. You may remember that he was particularly asked, are you sure that it was indorsed when it was delivered you? He saith that he is sure; and indeed the thing bespeaks itself. When a note is made payable to a particular person, if any other person brings it, every one expects that there should be an indorsement to intitle any person that is not the very person to whom it was made payable. I am therefore sure (saith he) that it was so indorsed: and as Mr. Edwards was a person of very great dealings and considerable substance, and so likely to have such a note made payable to him, I therefore gave credit to this note as a sufficient security to reimburse me the 450l. which I advanced thereupon.' This fact he tells you was thus transacted at that time; and he is sure that be received it from the de fendant thus indorsed, and that the defendant hath had the benefit of the draught which he gave him on the credit thereof. Mr. Harle hath allowed this in settling his accounts with his goldsmith. Upon this the note hath been read to shew you the purport thereof, and the indorsement thereon. The note is this, not there; that he went home, and heard that vedge or any thing of that nature, that sheweth there was a message left for him by the de-it to have been the outside of a sheet of paper. fendant, Mr. Hales, at Baker's coffee-house; that he went out in the afternoon, and had not a particular account of the message till he came home. The message was from Mr. Hales, that he had that morning paid to his goldsmiths Caswal and Mount 450l. on his ac count: Mr. Harle tells you that there was more money due to him on security. So much money was then paid in discharge of so much, part of money advanced by him to Mr. Hales, and it was the exact sum which had been advanced on the 13th of June on the credit of this note. He tells you, that in the evening Mr. Caswal came to him, and told him there was a melancholy account, that a sad accident had happened: for Mr. William Hales, the person that had paid them this money on his account, was taken up for forgery, and this money was attached in their hands for to prevent his issuing it out. Mr. Harle tells yon, that this was the first discovery that he had of the particular fact, that gave him occasion to make the more particular enquiry: he had indeed two or three days before spoke to a gentleman of the Exchequer, one Mr. Wright, bad shewed him the indorsement; and having some suspicion, asked him whether he was acquainted with Mr. Edwards's hand, and whether he thought that that was his hand-writing? Mr. Wright thought it was a little odd, was something diffident, but believed that it was Mr. Edwards's hand, as Mr. Harle himself also thought that it was. He saith, that after that the defendant was apprehended, he went to Mr. Wright to desire him to go with him, that they might have from Mr. Edwards more particular satisfaction. They went and met with Mr. Edwards, in Westminster-hall, shewed him the note, asked him whether he knew of it, and whether it was his indorsement? Mr. Edwards was very much startled, and said, that he never gave any such note, and knew nothing of it. Mr. Harle asked him whether the name was his hand-writing? He said that if it was, an ill use was made of it. Mr. Edwards took a copy of it, and kept it by him. The note hath been read to you, and appears to be a promissory note in the name of Mr. Robert Hales, for 800l. payable in three months, to Samuel Edwards, esq. The indorse ment is for, "Pray pay to the order of value received, SAMUEL EDWARDS." Gentlemen, upon the producing and reading of this note, Mr. Attorney hath made several observations on the manner of writing it. You have had the inspection of it, and something very particular appears to every one's view. It is by the counsel for the prosecutor supposed, that this note must be formed from part of a frank cover signedffree Samuel Edwards,' free being turned into for ye value received; that there is the remainder of another letter. And you may observe whether there is a sel All the edges indeed seem to be smooth and clean as a paper that is cut. The indorsement begins, Pray pay to the order of for' then comes ye, and then a large distance between that and value received.' So that it seems pretty extraordinary if any one was honestly writing, and had a paper not written on before, that they should write in this manner, that the word ye should be tacked to the word for,' and put at such a distance from ' value received.' Received' follows 'value' immediately in a more plain writing: besides, it is unusual to make use of the word ye before ' value received;' but they say it is more generally value received. You have an instance in the note itself; the conclusion of the note is value received:' and I believe the observation is just; that it is not so usual to say For ye value received.' But the observation of the counsel was this, that there was a necessity of this in order to accommodate the letters to the forgery; as the words now stand they exactly suited. And, gentlemen, the ƒ is of a paler ink than the or, and these letters thicker, and seem of a deeper ink. If there were two ce's before, the alteration and making the other letters must occasion the thickness of these letters, and their seeming of a blacker ink. Other letters being to be superinduced, they must of necessity be thicker and deeper than the first letters. Here is a very strange sort of an r, and the o seems very odd. At the end of the r is something made use of to assist to make the upper part of the Y which doth not stand cleverly. And you will find that part which is the head of the y much thicker than the other part that makes up the y. And then on the side or one shoulder of the y there is a sort of e put. You may see how improperly it stands. It is not an e directly over the y, which is the way sometimes of writing the' short; but it comes to the bottom of the head of the y. So that, gentlemen, these are the observations that have been made by the counsel. You have seen this note, and may observe 'upon it, whether you think these observations plain, proper and just? Upon this occasion, another servant of Mr. Edwards is called, one Mr. Spicer. He saith, that he hath been a clerk in the Exchequer above ten years, but in the whole in Mr. Edwards's service upwards of 20 years; that he is well acquainted with his public dealings and private transactions in money matters: and that he never knew or heard that he had any moneydealings with the defendant, which he believes be should, if there had been any, being bis clerk, and acquainted with his money-dealings. And he saith, that as to the name Samuel Edwards, he believes it to be Mr. Edwards's proper hand-writing, being very well acquainted with his hand. And he saith, that as to the indorsement, he believes that the f is his, but not the other letters; that he is satisfied that value received' is not Mr. Edwards's writing, And he saith, that the o and he doth not Therefore if the money had been repaid, that take to be Mr. Edwards's hand-writing, but had been no acquitting of the crime. That an alteration from something that Mr. Ed-will no more discharge a person, than if a wards had wrote before; that the usual way of felon should say that he is acquitted because Mr. Edwards franking is 'free' with a as the goods are restored. The behaviour afterhere free; and that the o appears to be made wards is not a sufficient acquittal of a crime. out of an altered letter. So that this is a And consider when that was. It was not proper observation, that there is an alteration, before, but upon the Monday, the very day as they believe upon their oaths. He saith, that he was apprehended. Then the message that it is bunglingly done; that he apprehends was left, and the money paid. You are to it done as hath been mentioned. Well, ano- consider, therefore, whether this did not arise ther witness is called, Mr. George Branth- from an apprehension and fear of a discovery, waite, a servant to Mess. Caswal and Mount. in order to clear things as well as he could? He saith, that this draught was brought to Gentlemen, as there is sufficient evidence to fix their office by the defendant himself, because this upon the defendant, so hath he not proved he hath put his mark upon it, as is proper for how he came by this note. He hath not called persons of such dealings; that that mark of one witness to shew that he had any moneyhis at the bottom reminds him that the defen- dealings with Mr. Edwards, or that he received dant brought it. Upon the bringing of this it of any other person; but it is left on the draught, he had two notes from this witness evidence given by the prosecutor. Therefore, on account of his master; one was for 250l. there can be no doubt in the matter. If a the other for 2201.: that came to 4701.: there- person is silent to the charge, and cannot give fore the deficiency of this draught was to be you any satisfaction as to it, it stands as fully supplied with another to make up that sum fixed upon him as if any had seen him write complete. Therefore, he saith, that he brought the indorsement. Therefore, gentlemen, you notes of Wanley's for 20l. which made up the are to consider, whether any thing appears to balance. The note for 250l. he saith, was afford the least presumption that this was a made payable to the defendant himself; and true indorsement made by Mr. Edwards, for that for 220l. to one Charlton Thrup; and value received by him? It is, gentlemen, an that at this time the draught and Wanley's offence of a very heinous nature, and, if not notes were delivered to him for these notes on suppressed, must tend to binder all commerce account of Mess. Caswal and Mount. This is by bills and paper-credit. If this be suffered the account given by them. The defendant to increase, none can take such a note, unless himself and his counsel are here. Nothing he goeth to the person himself. It will render material is said by them in defence, only Mr. it insecure to carry on commerce by notes or Lacy mentioned that there is no damage done bills. As to an indorsement of this nature, by this note, the 450l. borrowed on it being though it was not mentioned, it is proper for repaid. To this it was replied by Mr. Attor- me to take notice, that though the name be ney, that the money was paid upon account, not named, it may be made to any person. there being other monies due to Mr. Harle on The person, in whose possession it is, can go security; and besides it is attached in Mr. and receive the money. So that the indorseHarle's goldsmith's hands, to prevent its being ment is complete authority to impower the issued out. Gentlemen, you will observe, that person in whose possession the note is, to reif this was a real indorsement, it would be an ceive the money, and likewise to charge the assurance of paying the whole debt. Who- person that so indorsed it with the re-imbursesoever indorseth a note, whereof no part is ment of the money. Therefore, gentlemen, paid, is liable to the whole. Therefore the the crime and offence seems complete. Upon question is not, whether or not this money was this evidence, it doth not seem to me that there paid? But whether here is not an engagement can be any doubt with you, whether he be to pay the note, which the re-payment of the guilty of this fact or not.. money borrowed thereon is no fence against? 473. The Trial of WILLIAM HALES, for a Misdemeanor, in obtaining the Sum of Four Hundred and Fifty Pounds, from Mr. William Harle, by false Tokens:† 3 GEORGE II. A. D. 1729. Jury sworn over again. Harle. On the 13th of June, Mr. Hales applied to me, to lend him 450l. upon this Clerk. OYEZ, Oyez, if any one can in-note. I accordingly made a draught on my form, &c. Gentlemen of the Jury, William Hales stands indicted by the name of William Hales, &c. for falsly and deceitfully obtaining the sum of 4501. of Mr. William Harle by a false token, to wit, a promissory note in the name of Mr. Robert Hales, whereby the said Robert Hales is supposed to engage to pay within three months after date, the sum of 800l. to Samuel Edwards, esq. with a counterfeit indorsement on this note to the great damage, &c. To this indictment be hath pleaded Not Guilty. goldsmiths, which I suppose was paid the same day, having taken up the draught on settling mine accounts. L. C. B. Pengelly. Mr. Lacy, do you expect that they should go on further in their eridence?-Mr. Lacy. No, my lord. L. C. B. Pengelly. This indictment is against William Hales, goldsmith. It is for obtaining upon this note a draught equivalent to money, and which afterwards produced money, by this false token. If the note was Mr. Strange. This likewise is an indictment forged, it was a false note. He brought this against the defendant Mr. William Hales, and note as a good note, to induce Mr. Harle to acis for falsely and deceitfully obtaining a sum of commodate him with 450l. thereupon. That money of Mr. William Harle by a false token. is the description of the act of parliament, And it sets forth, that the defendant having in that if any one by a false token doth obtain or his possession a promissory note of Mr. Robert get any thing or any goods of another's, corHales's for 8001. payable in three months after poral punishment shall be inflicted. If this date to Samuel Edwards, esq. with a forged in-appear to be a forged indorsement; this being dorsement thereon in the name of the said Sa- a false token, he must be guilty.* So that the muel Edwards, esq. did falsly and deceitfully evidence is the same as to both these indictobtain of one Mr. William Harle, the sum of ments. 450l. on the said note. This is laid to be to the great damage, &c. Mr. Hungerford. May it please your lordship, the fact charged is the very same as in the former cause already heard, only upon a different law, 33 Hen. 8. There was, it seems, so long agone an abominable practice of obtaining money by false tokens. The act of parliament hath prohibited that practice, and made it penal. There is but one witness we shall trouble your lordship with. Mr. Harle sworn. Mr. Hungerford. Mr. Harle, pray give an account to my lord, and the jury, when you first saw that note, and what money you paid upon it. * See the preceding and following Cases. †These Trials were taken in short-hand by order of Mr. Edwards. Former Edition. The Officer sworn to keep the Jury. Clerk. Are you all agreed in your verdict? Clerk. Who shall say for you? Clerk. How say you, Is William Hales Guilty of the misdemeanour wherewith he is charged, in forging and publishing an indorse ment on a promissory note, or not Guilty? Foreman. Guilty. Clerk. How say you, Is William Hales Guilty of the misdemeanour wherewith he stands charged in obtaining money by a false token, or not Guilty?-Foreman, Guilty. * As to this, see East's Pleas of the Crown, chap. 18, sect. 6. 474. The Trial of WILLIAM HALES and THOMAS KINNERSLEY, Clerk, for forging and counterfeiting a Note of Hand, bearing date August 16, 1727,* for Twelve Hundred and Sixty Pounds, payable to Samuel Edwards, esq. or Order, signed Thomas Kinnersley, and indorsed Samuel Edwards: 3 GEORGE II. A. D. 1729. Jury called over again, and sworn. Crier. OYEZ, Oyez. If any one can inform my lord the king's justice, the king's serjeants, attorney, &c. in this cause between our sovereign lord the king and William Hales and Thomas Kinnersley, let them come forth, &c. Here the Indictment was read. Mr. Strange. Gentlemen of the jury. This is an indictment against the two prisoners at the bar, William Hales of London, late goldsmith, and Thomas Kinnersley, clerk. The indictment sets forth that these two defendants, being persons of ill fame and reputation, and devising and intending to defraud Samuel Edwards, esq. and divers other his majesty's subjects, in March last had in their custody a certain note or a writing purporting to be a promissory note signed by Thomas Kinnersley, and dated Aug, 16, 1727. In this note Thomas Kinnersley is supposed to promise to pay 1,260l. to Samuel Edwards, esq. within three months after date, for value received; that on this note which they had in their custody, they forged an indorsement in these words, "Pray pay to the order of for value received, Samuel Edwards;" that thus having in their custody this note with this forged indorsement thereupon, and knowing this to be a forged indorsement, they did afterwards publish it to be a true one. These offences are laid to be to the great damage of the said Samuel Edwards, esq. the breach of his majesty's peace, and the ill example of other his majes ty's subjects in like case offending. To this indictment they have pleaded Not Guilty. Attorney General. My lord, and gentlemen of the jury, I am of counsel on the same side for my lord the king. Gentlemen, the charge against the defendant is for forging an indorse ment on a promissory note for 1,260l. Likewise they are charged with publishing the said counterfeit indorsement for a true one, knowing the same to be forged and counterfeit. Gentlemen, this is not the first of several facts of this nature that have come to be considered with regard to the defendant Mr. Hales: but the first that hath come to be examined in this place charged upon the other defendant, Mr. Kinnersley, a clergyman: and it is a very me See the preceding and following Cases. lancholy thing that when a scene of forgery of this nature is going on, which as you have been told is of a very pernicious nature to trade and commerce, we should see one charged therewith that hath a right to appear in that habit, and thinks fit to appear here in it. But it will appear that there is just ground to charge not only the defendant Hales, but the defendant Kinnersley. Gentlemen, as to the fact, it will seem that it took rise in the same manner as the former fact; that by that correspondence that Mr. William Hales thought fit to let himself into with Mr. Edwards, by applying for frank covers to send news into the country, he took occasion to make use of such a paper; and that there being an intimacy between him and Mr. Kinnersley, Mr. Hales having by this means possessed himself of a frank cover with the name of "Samuel Edwards, ffree" thereon, that upon a piece of that paper cut off from the rest, a promissory note is written. it that the note will appear to be the handwriting of Mr. Kinnersley, dated in a different hand, Aug. 16, 1727. The words are these: I take "I promise to pay to Samuel Edwards, esq. or his order, three months after date, the sum of twelve hundred and sixty pounds, for the value received. THOMAS KINNERSLEY." On the back of the paper these circumstances will appear: first, the edge of the paper on that side of it where the indorsement is wrote appears cut off; and as in the former case, so here there are the tails of two or three letters still remaining plainly to be seen. And it will appear that here is an irregularity and unevenness in the cutting; the edge in one place smoother being turned in, and an book or dent made in the paper. Under this, pretty near the top of the paper, is written, "Pray pay to the order of," then there is a wide blank as in the former instance; then follow the words, "For the value received, Samuel Edwards." It appears that the words "for the " ten in a stronger and blacker ink than the former; the f of the former sort, probably Mr. Edwards's. The word "the" is not written in a contraction as before, but at length. Here, instead of changing letters, erasing or turning, are letters written over in a blacker ink: the other letters, as the two ec appear in a paler ink; so that it will appear to a demonstration that this was a frank turned to this use. Other observations will likewise appear as to the are writ |