Carlisle Patriot, 23 Oct 1824 - Cumberland Sessions (3)

1 view

Skip to first unread message

petra.mi...@doctors.org.uk

unread,

May 11, 2025, 7:41:31 PMMay 11

to CUL Google Group, Cumbria Mailing List (CFHS)

Saturday 23 Oct 1824 (p. 3, col. 1-4)

CUMBERLAND SESSIONS.

[continued]

WM. M'ALLISTER and NICHOLAS LENNAGAN, of Whitehaven, were charged with uttering counterfeit money to Mr. and Mrs. SALKELD, inn-keepers, Dissington, knowing the said money to be counterfeit, &c.

They were arraigned early on Tuesday, and pleaded not guilty. But LENNAGAN said they were not prepared to go to trial on account of the absence of a material witness to show where they got the base money. He said they had been at harvest work in different parts of the county, and having gone to Carlisle, they went into a lodging-house there, in some street of which he did not remember the name, and while drinking liquor there he changed a pound note in the presence of one CORRAN or CURWEN, a watch-maker, and received for it eight half-crowns, among them those which were paid to Mrs. SALKELD. He had mentioned this at Whitehaven, and since he came to Penrith, but as he had no means of compelling CORRAN to come forward, he was not present.

Mr. COURTENAY, who was for the prosecution, said he had no wish to hurry on the trial; but he begged to observe that base coin had been found on the prisoner to the amount of nearly four pounds, therefore it would be no defence to shew that he had received as change one pound's worth.

Mr. JAMES thought that time should be allowed the prisoner, to see if he could produce this witness.

After a few observations from other Magistrates to the same effect, the trial was postponed, and the Court adjourned at about two on Tuesday afternoon, the Grand Jury not having sent up any more bills on which proceedings could be founded.

On Wednesday, about mid-day, the prisoners were again put to the bar; but no Mr. CORRAN made his appearance.

Mr. ARMSTRONG stated the nature of the offence, and Mr. COURTENAY addressed the jury. The prisoner had first uttered two counterfeit half-crowns to Mrs. SALKELD, and afterwards, on the same day, uttered a base shilling to Mr. SALKELD—this second uttering constituting a double offence. The real question for the jury would be, whether they uttered knowingly. No direct evidence could be given as to that point: the fact, if it existed, could only be inferred from accompanying circumstances, and they would be found, he thought he might say, to warrant such a conclusion. The prisoners called at Mr. SALKELD's house late at night, and asked for a tankard of ale, in payment for which they tendered a half-crown; and succeeding in passing off that, they had another changed for a second tankard; and when Mrs. SALKELD, whom they had defrauded, retired, they attempted to palm upon the landlord a third half-crown, though in possession of smaller money just received in change. This led to suspicion and ultimate detection, when large quantities of base money were found in the prisoners' possession. While in the house, too, they assumed a false character—one of them pretending to be a cattle-dealer, and the other his man. They were charged with uttering jointly. If they acted in concert, and it would be shewn they did so act, both were equally guilty, though one only might have paid the money. He mentioned this to prevent any misconception as to the law of the case on the part of the jury.

Mary SALKELD sworn.—My husband keeps a public house at Dissington. The prisoners came into our house together about eleven on the night of the 21st of September, called for a tankard of ale, and in paying for it LENNAGAN laid down a half-crown, and I gave him four sixpences in change. They talked and acted together. LENNAGAN pretended to be a dealer in cattle, and that M'ALLISTER was his driver. They had another tankard of ale, and that M'ALLISTER paid for, also with a half-crown, and change was given to him. After this I went to bed, leaving my husband up, who subsequently came into the bed-room for change, and I said they could not have occasion for change of another half crown, when two had been already changed.

Wm. SALKELD, husband of the last witness, sworn.—After my wife went to bed, the prisoners called for rum, and tendered in payment a third half-crown, wanting change; and on taking it to Mrs. S. she said they could not want change, and I went back and told them so, and was paid in copper. Afterwards they wished for another tankard of ale, and M'ALLISTER paid for it with a shilling, receiving sixpence change, and then they departed. As I was about to go to bed, I laid down the shilling on the table, and finding it to be bad, examined the half-crowns, and at first did not think them bad. I went to bed; but got up, again examined the half-crowns, and finding them base, on comparing them with others, I set out for Whitehaven in pursuit. M'ALLISTER was afterwards found asleep in a town's cart, near the harbour, having about his person base coin to the amount of £3 11s. We then went to LENNAGAN's house. He himself opened the door, and on seeing me he started back. We heard something jingle on the floor, as if money had been thrown about, and when we entered we found on the floor a good many half-crowns and shillings, all bad. They were taken possession of by HEXHAM, a watchman, who had accompanied me.

M'ALLISTER said the landlord and themselves were alike drunk at the time. Mr. SALKELD denied the truth of this assertion.

Benjamin HEXHAM, the watchman, having been applied to by Mr. SALKELD, on the night in question, went in search of M'ALLISTER, whom he found asleep in a cart, having about his person base coin to the amount of £3 11s., among which were many half-crowns. He afterwards went to LENNAGAN's, and found on the house floor six base shillings, and in his pockets £5 3s. all counterfeit. One good shilling, only, was found on M'ALLISTER, and five sixpences and one good shilling on LENNAGAN.

Thomas GREEN, police-officer, produced the base money passed upon Mr. SALKELD, who swore to the marks which had been made upon it.

Mr. ROACH, silversmith, proved that the whole was spurious. Both parcels found on the prisoners, and the half-crowns and shilling uttered, exactly corresponded: they were all, in fact, of one manufacture.

This was the case for the prosecution.

LENNAGAN addressed the Jury, in a conversational tone, at some length. He repeated what he said on Tuesday, about changing the note at Carlisle; and he attempted to account for the possession of the parcels of base coin, by asserting, in a very solemn manner, that one CLARK requested them to take them to Whitehaven, they not knowing what the parcels contained. The half-crowns changed, he said, were part of those received in the change at Carlisle. One sentence of his narrative excited much merriment. He was entering into a great many particulars as to drinking here, and paying there, the whole of which bore the strongest marks of falsehood; but in some trifling matter, he would not say whether he did so or so, "for fear he should tell a lie!" M'ALLISTER bore witness to the correctness of LENNAGAN's statement in every particular. "Besides," added LENNAGAN with much keenness, "you cannot believe what Mr. SALKELD says, for he was drunk; and you heard that he swore there were half-crowns on the floor, while the watchman swore there were only shillings."

The Chairman thought it scarcely necessary to repeat the evidence in so clear a case.

The Jury having deliberated some time, the foreman announced that a difficulty had occurred—they could not exactly agree as to one point. A juror then said, that the only doubt he had upon his mind was with respect to the witness at Carlisle. It was not likely that such a person would come forward, being a party concerned, unless he were compelled; and the juror wished to have some explanation on that head.

The Chairman said the Court knew nothing of any such witness, except that the prisoner had made some assertions to that effect. It had no power to order a witness to appear.

The Jury then returned a verdict of Guilty.

Mr. COURTENAY begged to observe that the statute prescribed the punishment of the offence; namely, one year's imprisonment, with sureties for two years thereafter, the court having the power to order hard labour. Sentence accordingly.

After the trial, M'ALLISTER requested the return of a bundle of shawls which were found under his head, when he was apprehended in the cart. On receiving the bundle from the constable, he very carefully counted them, and exclaimed "Aye, that's right!" He displayed much more anxiety about his shawls than about his imprisonment.