Carlisle Patriot, 11 Mar 1826 - Cumberland Lent Assizes (14)

[petra.mi...@doctors.org.uk]

Saturday 11 Mar 1826   (p. 2, col. 6 - p. 3, col. 6; and p. 4, col. 1-3)

 

CUMBERLAND LENT ASSIZES, 1926.

 

UTTERING FORGED NOTES.

 

[continued]

 

The last Charter of the Royal Bank of Scotland, dated 24th Feb. 1804, was put in.

 

Mr. COURTENAY jocosely observed that it was in Scotch Latin.—Mr. DUNDAS: That is much better than English Latin.

 

Passages from this instrument were read in the original, to show the authority of the Royal Bank to issue and take up notes, &c. "according as the Court of Directors shall prescribe." But on closer investigation, it turned out that the charter produced, merely recited the power granted in instruments of much earlier date, there being, in all, seven charters.

 

His Lordship wished to see the charter referred to.

 

That was not in Court!

 

Mr. COURTENAY submitted that it was enough to show that the incorporation had power generally. The right to issue bills of exchange depended upon common law, and also upon Act of Parliament.

 

After considerable search, the sixth warrant was produced, but that referred to the fifth, and the fifth was in Edinburgh!

 

Mr. COURTENAY, after looking at a printed translation of the various charters, said they gave no such power as his Lordship required proof of. The Bank had power given generally. When incorporated as a Banking Company, they had the power possessed by every individual, by the general law of the land, and might issue and take up any description of promissory notes.

 

Mr. PATTESON dissented. The general law could not give the particular authority of this Bank. He knew not what part of the common law could be applied to the case. If that could be applied, why the charter?

 

Mr. Baron HULLOCK.—A specific power must be possessed to sue and be sued.

 

Mr. PATTESON submitted, that the Court could not assume that power.

 

Mr. Baron HULLOCK.—No. I must have their authority produced.

 

Mr. COURTENAY and Mr. DUNDAS commenced a new exploration of the documents before them.

 

His Lordship said he could not sit there all day while they searched after what ought to have been prepared before-hand. He would reserve the point.

 

Mr. BONNER was examined by the Judge.—He had been a Clerk in the Bank nine years; and during that time no new charter had been granted; the last dated 24th Feb. 1804. During his connection with the Bank, it had been the uniform practice of the Bank to issue guinea and one-pound notes, to a considerable amount every year. When the notes are presented by the holders they are paid in cash, if demanded, and may be re-issued, if the Bank chooses. He merely knew the fact; always understanding that the charter empowered this. The last charter was obtained, he believed, simply for the purpose of increasing the capital.

 

Mr. COURTENAY.—All that we can do is, to produce the last charter, which confirms and ratifies all the powers conferred by former charters.

 

His Lordship took a note of the passage in the original.—The terms were: "In as ample a manner as if [sic] herein particularly mentioned."

 

The forgeries were put in and read.

 

Mr. PATTESON objected to a discrepancy between the note and the indictment. In the latter it was "cosher:" in the note, he submitted, it was "cashier."

 

His Lordship said it was much more like the former than the latter in the original.

 

The Prisoner said nothing in his defence; but handed in a letter which was not read in Court.

 

In summing up the evidence, the Judge said it might happen that the prisoner had received these notes honestly: the notes in the room might also have been put there by another person. But they should form their judgment from the circumstances attendant upon the uttering, for all the notes were passed from six o'clock to ten on the same morning.

 

The Jury, after a few minutes' consultation, returned a Verdict of Guilty.

 

The prisoner was again arraigned for uttering another forged note, with intent to defraud James JACKSON, and the Royal Bank of Scotland; but as no evidence was offered in support of the indictment, a verdict of acquittal was of course recorded.

 

The point reserved will be submitted to the twelve judges. There is little doubt of its being fatal—so that the prisoner will escape punishment. The Judge, on the application of Mr. COURTENAY, allowed the expenses of the prosecution.

 

 

[to be continued]