Sometimes the body of the cheque that contains the genuine signature
is forged. For instance, in a cheque for eight pounds the letter “y”
may be added to the word “eight,” which makes it “eighty;” and a
cypher appended to the figure “8” making it “80,” to correspond with
the writing. The forms of cheques are frequently obtained by means of
a forged order, such as A knowing B to have an account at a bank, A
writes a letter to the banker purporting to come from B, asking for
a cheque-book, which the banker frequently sends on the faith of the
letter being genuine. Sometimes cheque-books are stolen by burglars and
other thieves who enter business premises. By some device they get the
signature of a person who has money in that bank, and forge it to the
stolen cheques. It has been known for forgers who wanted to obtain
money from a bank, to go to a solicitor whom they knew kept a bank
account. One of them would instruct the solicitor to enter an action
against one of his confederates for a pretended debt. After proceedings
had been instituted the party would pay the amount claimed to the
solicitor; and his companion, who had given instructions in reference
to the action, then goes and gets a cheque for the amount, and by
that means obtains the genuine signature, and is enabled to insert a
facsimile of it in forged cheques. By this means he obtains money from
the bank. Cases of this kind very frequently occur.
Sometimes forgeries are done by clerks and others who have an
opportunity of getting the signature of their employer. They forge his
name, or alter the body of the cheque. In many commercial houses the
body of the cheque is filled up by the confidential clerk and taken to
the head of the firm, who signs it. These forgeries are sometimes for a
small sum, at other times for a large amount.
Several cases of uttering forged cheques were lately tried before the
police-courts.
A respectable-looking young woman, who described herself as a domestic
servant, was brought before the Lord Mayor, charged with uttering a
cheque for 5_l._ 18_s._, purporting to be signed by Mr. W. P. Bennett,
with intent to defraud a banking firm in London. She had recently been
on a visit to London, and had been lent a small sum of money by another
servant in town, along with some dresses, amounting to 10_s._ 6_d._
On the 30th October the latter young woman received a letter from the
prisoner, enclosing a forged cheque, and at the same time stating that
a young man with whom she had been keeping company had died, and had
given her this cheque to get cashed. If the servant could not get away
to get the cheque cashed, the prisoner wished her to lend her what she
was able, to go to the young man’s funeral. On presenting the cheque at
the banker’s the forgery was discovered.
It appeared from the evidence that the prisoner had been lodging in the
same house with Mr. Bennett, whose signature she forged.
A young man of respectable appearance residing in the neighbourhood of
Fleet Street, was tried at Guildhall lately, charged with uttering a
cheque for 6_l._, well knowing the same to be a forgery. He had gone
to the landlord of a public-house in Essex Street, Bouverie Street,
and asked him to cash it. It was drawn by Josiah Evans in favour of
C. B. Bennett, Esq., and indorsed by the latter. The cheque was on Sir
Benjamin Hayward, Bart., & Co., of Manchester. When presented at the
bank, it was returned with a note stating that no such person had an
account there, and they did not know any of the names. The criminal was
then arrested, and committed for trial.
_Forged Acceptance._--A bill of exchange is a mercantile contract
written on a slip of paper, whereby one person requests another to pay
money on his account to a third person at the time therein specified.
The person who draws the bill is termed the drawer, the party to whom
it is addressed before acceptance is called the drawee--afterwards
the acceptor. The party for whom it is drawn is termed the payee, who
indorses the bill, and is then styled the indorser, and the party to
whom he transfers it is called the indorsee. The person in possession
of the bill is termed the holder.
An acceptance is an engagement to pay the bill, the person writing
the word accepted across the bill with his name under it. This may be
_absolute_ or _qualified_. An _absolute_ acceptance is an engagement
to pay the bill according to its request. A _qualified_ acceptance
undertakes to do it conditionally.
Bills are either inland or foreign. The inland bill is on one piece of
paper; foreign bills generally consist of three parts called a “set;”
so that should the bearer lose one, he may receive payment for the
other. Each part contains a condition that it shall be paid provided
the others are unpaid. These bills require to have a stamp of proper
value to make them valid.
Forgeries of bills seldom consist of the whole bill, but either the
acceptor’s signature, or that of the drawer, or the indorser. Sometimes
the contents of the bill is altered to make it payable earlier.
These forgeries are not so numerous, and are frequently done by parties
who get the bills in a surreptitious way. It often happens that one
party draws the bill in another name, forging the acceptance, and
passes it to a third party who is innocent of the forgery. If the
person who forged the acceptance, pays the money to the bank where the
bill is payable when it is due, the forgery is not detected. When he is
not able to pay in the money it is discovered. It happens in this way:
A B and C are commercial men, A stands well in the commercial world;
B draws a bill in his name, and without his knowledge. The name of A
being good, the bill passes to C without any suspicion. If B can meet
it at the time it is due, A does not know that his name has been used.
If the bill is not paid at the proper time, C takes it to A, and thus
discovers the forgery.
_Forged Wills._--A will is a written document in which the testator
disposes of his property after his death. It is not necessary that
it should be written on stamped paper, as no stamp duty is required
till the death of the testator, when the will is proved in court in
the district where he resided. The essentials are that it should be
legible, and so intelligible, that the testator’s intention can be
clearly understood.
If the will is not signed by the testator, it must be signed by some
other person by his direction, and in his presence; two or more
witnesses being present who must attest that the will was signed, and
the signature acknowledged by the testator in their presence.
No will is valid unless signed at the foot of the page, or at the end
by the testator, or by some other person in his presence, and by his
direction. Marriage revokes a will previously made.
A codicil is a supplement, or addition to the will, altering some
part, or making an addition. It may be written on the same document,
or on another paper, and folded up with the original instrument. There
can only be one will, yet there may be a number of codicils attached
to it, and the last is equally binding as the first, if they are not
contradictory.
Forgeries of wills are generally done by relations, who get a
fictitious will prepared in their favour contrary to the genuine will.
On the death of the supposed testator, the forged will is put forth as
the genuine one, and the other is destroyed.
All parties expecting property on the death of a relative or friend,
and finding none, should be careful to have the signatures of the
witnesses examined, to test whether they are genuine; and also the
signature of the testator.
Every will can be seen at the district court, where they are proved,
on the payment of a shilling. Such an examination is the only likely
method of detecting the forgery.
There are several other classes of forgery in addition to those already
noticed, such as forging certificates of character, and bills of lading.
A case of the latter kind was recently tried at Guildhall. A merchant,
near the Haymarket, and an artist also in the West-end, were arraigned
with having feloniously forged and altered certain bills of lading;
one of these represented ten casks of alkali amounting to the value of
84_l._, and another, twenty-six casks of alkali worth 140_l._, with the
intention of defrauding certain merchants in London. All the bills of
lading were with one exception to a certain extent genuine, that is,
were filled up in the first instance. But after being signed by the
wharfinger, they were altered by the introduction of words and figures,
to represent a larger quantity of goods than had been shipped. The
prisoners were committed for trial.
Number of cases of forgery in the metropolitan
districts for the year 1860 27
Ditto ditto in the City 20
--
47
Amount of loss thereby in the metropolitan
districts £254
Ditto ditto in the City 736
----
£990
CHEATS.
EMBEZZLERS.
This is the crime of a servant appropriating to his own use the money
or goods received by him on account of his master, and is perpetrated
in the metropolis by persons both in inferior and superior positions.
Were a party to advance money or goods to an acquaintance or friend,
for which the latter did not give a proper return, the case would be
different, and require to be sued for in a civil action.
Embezzlement is often committed by journeymen bakers entrusted by
their employers with quantities of bread to distribute to customers
in different parts of the metropolis, by brewer’s draymen delivering
malt liquors, by carmen and others engaged in their various errands. A
case of this kind occurred recently. A carman in the service of a coal
merchant in the West-end was charged with embezzling 6_l._ 1_s._ 6_d._
He had been in the habit of going out with coals to customers, and was
empowered to receive the money, but had gone into a public-house on his
return, got intoxicated, and lost the whole of his cash. He was tried
at Westminster Police Court, and sentenced to pay a fine of 10_l._ with
costs. This crime is frequent among this class. The chief inducements
which lead to it are the habits of drinking, prevalent among them,
gambling in beer-shops, attending music-saloons, such as the Mogul,
Drury Lane, and Paddy’s Goose, Ratcliffe Highway, and attending running
matches. Their pay is not sufficient to enable them to indulge in those
habits, and this leads them to commit the crime of embezzlement.
Persons in trade frequently send out their shopmen to receive orders,
and obtain payment for goods supplied to families at their residence,
and are occasionally entrusted with goods on stalls. In June, 1861, a
respectable-looking young man, was placed at the bar of the Southwark
Police Court, charged with having embezzled 39_l._, the property of
a bookselling firm in the Strand. He had been entrusted with a stall
where he sold books and newspapers, and was called to account for
the receipts daily. One day he neglected to send 8_l._, the receipts
of the previous Saturday, and for other seven days he had given no
proper count and reckoning. He admitted the neglect, and confessed he
had appropriated the money. He was paid at the rate of 1_l._ 10_s._ a
month, which with commission amounted to about 6_l._ or 7_l._
A clerk and salesman in the service of a draper in Camberwell, was
charged with embezzling various sums of money belonging to his
employer. It was his duty each night to account for the goods he
disposed of, and the money he received. One morning he went out with
a quantity of goods, and did not return at the proper time, when his
employer found him in a beershop in the Blackfriars Road. On asking
him what had become of the goods, he replied he had left them at a
public-house in the Borough, which was untrue. In the account-book
found upon him it was ascertained that he had received several sums of
money he had not accounted for.
A robbery by a young man of this class was very ingeniously detected a
few weeks ago, and brought before the Marlborough Police Court.
A shopman to a cheesemonger in Oxford Street was charged with stealing
money from the till. He had been in his employer’s service for ten
months, and served at the counter along with three other shopmen. The
cheesemonger having found a considerable deficiency in his receipts
suspected his honesty, especially as he was in the habit of attending
places of amusement, and indulging in other extravagances he knew were
beyond his means. He marked three half-crowns, and put them in the till
to which the young man had access. Soon after he saw the latter put
in his hand, and take out a piece of money. He made an excuse to send
the shopman out for a moment, and on examining the till, missed one
of the marked pieces of money. He thereupon gave information to the
police, and again placed money in the till similarly marked, leaving
a police-officer on the watch. The shopman was again detected, he was
then arrested, and taken to the police-station.
Many young men of this class are wretchedly paid by their employers,
and have barely enough to maintain them and keep them in decent
clothing. Many of them spend their money foolishly on extravagant
dress, or associating with girls, attending music-saloons, such as
Weston’s, in Holborn; the Pavilion, near the Haymarket; Canterbury
Hall; the Philharmonic, Islington; and others. Some frequent the
Grecian Theatre, City Road, and other gay resorts, and are led into
crime. In one season eighteen girls were known to have been seduced
by fast young men, and to become prostitutes through attending
music-saloons in the neighbourhood of Tottenham Court Road.
Embezzlements are occasionally committed by females of various classes.
Some of them, by fraudulent representations, obtain goods from various
tradesmen, consisting of candles, soap, sugar, as on account of their
customers. Some women of a higher class, such as dressmakers, and
others, are entrusted with merinos, silks, satins, and other drapery
goods which they embezzle.
A young married woman was lately tried at Guildhall, on a charge of
disposing of a quantity of silk entrusted to her. It appeared from
the evidence of the salesman of the silk manufacturer, that this
female applied to him for work, at same time producing a written
recommendation, purporting to come from a person known by the firm.
Materials to the value of 5_l._ 15_s._ were given her to be wrought up
into an article of dress. On applying for it at the proper time, he
found she had sold the materials, and had left her lodging. While the
work was supposed to be in progress, the firm had also given her 2_l._
13_s._, on partial payment. She pleaded poverty as the cause of her
embezzling the goods.
Parties connected with public societies occasionally embezzle the money
committed to their charge. The secretary of a friendly society in the
east-end, was brought before the Thames Police Court, charged with
embezzling various sums of money he had received on account of the
society. The secretary of another friendly society on the Surrey side,
was lately charged at Southwark Police Court with embezzling upwards
of 100_l._ This society has branches in all parts of the kingdom, but
the central office is in the metropolis. The secretary had been in
their service for upwards of two years, at a fixed salary. It was his
duty to receive contributions from the country, and town members; and
to account for the same to the treasurer. He recently absconded, when
large defalcations were discovered amounting to upwards of 100_l._
A considerable number of embezzlements are committed by commercial
travellers, and by clerks in lawyers’ offices, banks, commercial firms,
and government offices. Some of them of great and serious amounts.
Tradesmen and others in the middle class, and some respectable
labouring men, and mechanics, place their sons in counting-houses, or
other establishments superior to their own position; these foolishly
try to maintain the appearance of their fellow-clerks who have ampler
pecuniary means. This often leads to embezzling the property of the
employer or firm.
Crimes of this class are occasionally committed by lawyers’ clerks, who
are in many cases wretchedly paid, as well as by some who have handsome
salaries. Numerous embezzlements are also perpetrated in commercial
firms, by their servants; some of them to the value of many thousand
pounds.
A commercial traveller was lately brought up at the Mansion House,
charged with embezzlement. It appears he travelled for a firm in
the City, and had been above ten years in their service at a salary
of 1_l._ 1_s._ per day. It was his duty to take orders and collect
accounts as they became due. Some days he received from the customers
certain sums and afterwards paid a less amount to the firm, keeping the
rest of the money in his hands, which he appropriated. Another day he
received a sum of money he never accounted for. He was committed for
trial.
An embezzlement was committed by a cashier to a commercial firm in the
City. It appeared from the evidence, he had been in the service of his
employers for ten years, and kept the petty cash-book; with an account
of all sums paid. He had to account for the amounts given him as petty
cash, and for disbursements whenever he should be called.
From the extravagant style in which he was living, which reached
the ear of the firm, their suspicions were aroused, and one of them
asked him to bring his books into the counting-house, and render the
customary account of the petty cash. His employer discovered the
balance of some of the pages did not correspond with the balance
brought forward, and asked the cashier to account for it; when he
acknowledged that he had appropriated the difference to his own use.
Several items were then pointed out, ranging over a number of months,
in which he had plundered his employers of several hundred pounds.
This was effected in a very simple way; by carrying the balance of the
cash in hand to the top of next page 100_l._ less than it was on the
preceding page, and by calling the disbursements when his employers
checked the accounts, 100_l._ more than they really were.
The books of commercial firms are frequently falsified in other modes,
to effect embezzlements.
These defalcations often arise from fast life, extravagant habits,
and gambling. Many fashionable clerks in lawyers’ offices, banks, and
Government offices, frequent the Oxford and Alhambra music halls,
the West-end theatres, concerts, and operas. They attend the Holborn
Assembly-room and the Argyle Rooms, and are frequently to be seen
at masked balls, and at Cremorne Gardens during the season. They
occasionally indulge in midnight carousals in the Turkish divans and
supper-rooms. Some Government clerks have high salaries, and keep a
mistress in fashionable style, with brougham and coachman, and footman;
others maintain their family in a style their salary is unable to
support, all of which lead them step by step to embezzlement and ruin.
Number of cases of embezzlement in the
Metropolitan districts for 1860 223
Ditto ditto in the City 70
---
293
Value of money and property abstracted
thereby in the Metropolitan districts-- £5,271
Ditto ditto in the City 2,660
------
£7,931
MAGSMEN, OR SHARPERS.
This is a peculiar class of unprincipled men, who play tricks with
cards, skittles, &c. &c., and lay wagers with the view of cheating
those strangers who may have the misfortune to be in their company.
Their mode of operation is this: There are generally three of them in
a gang--seldom or never less. They go out together, but do not walk
beside each other when they are at work. One may be on the one side of
the street, and the other two arm-in-arm on the other. They generally
dress well, and in various styles, some are attired as gentlemen,
others as country farmers. In one gang, a sharper is dressed as a
coachman in livery, and in another they have a confederate attired as a
parson, and wearing green spectacles.
Many of them start early in the morning from the bottom of Holborn
Hill, and branch off in different directions in search of dupes.
They frequent Fleet Street, Oxford Street, Strand, Regent Street,
Shoreditch, Whitechapel, Commercial Road, the vicinity of the railway
stations, and the docks. They are generally to be seen wandering about
the streets till four o’clock in the afternoon, unless they have
succeeded in picking up a stranger likely to be a victim. They visit
the British Museum, St. Paul’s, Westminster Abbey, and the Crystal
Palace, &c., and on market days attend the fairs.
The person who walks the street in front of the gang, is generally the
most engaging and social; the other two keep in sight, and watch his
movements. As the former proceeds along he keenly observes the persons
passing. If he sees a countryman or a foreigner pass who appears to
have money, or a person loitering by a shop-window, he steps up to him
and probably enters into conversation regarding some object in sight.
For instance, in passing Somerset House in the Strand, he will go
up to him and ask what noble building that is, hinting at the same
time that he is a stranger in London. It frequently occurs that the
individual he addresses is also a stranger in London. Having entered
into conversation, the first object he has in view is to learn from
the person the locality to which he belongs. The sharp informs him he
has some relation there, or knows some person in the town or district.
(Many of the magsmen have travelled a good deal, and are acquainted
with many localities, some of them speak several foreign languages.) He
may then represent that he has a good deal of property, and is going
back to this village to give so much money to the poor. It sometimes
occurs in the course of conversation he proposes to give the stranger
a sum of money to distribute among the poor of his district, as he is
specially interested in them, and may at the same time produce his
pocket-book, with a bundle of flash notes. This may occur in walking
along the street. He will then propose to enter a beer-shop, or
gin-palace to have a glass of ale or wine. They go in accordingly. When
standing at the bar, or seated in the parlour, one of his confederates,
enters, and calls for a glass of liquor.
This party appears to be a total stranger to his companion. He soon
enters as it were casually into conversation, and they possibly speak
of their bodily strength. A bet is made that one of them cannot throw a
weight as many yards as the other. They make a wager, and the stranger
is asked to go with them as a referee, to decide the bet. They may call
a cab, and adjourn to some well-known skittle-alley. On going there
they find another confederate, who also pretends to be unacquainted
with the others. One of the two who made the wager as to throwing the
weight may pace the skittle-ground to find its dimensions, and pretend
it is not long enough.
They will then possibly propose to have a game at skittles, and will
bet with each other that they will throw down the pins in so many
throws.
The sharp who introduced the stranger, and assumes to be his friend,
always is allowed to win, perhaps from 5_s._ to 10_s._, or more, as the
case may be. He plays well, and the other is not so good. Up to this
time the intended victim has no hand in the game. Another bet is made,
and the stranger is possibly induced to join in it with his agreeable
companion, and it is generally arranged that he wins the first time.
He is persuaded to bet for a higher amount by himself, and not in
partnership, which he loses, and continues to do so every time till he
has lost all he possessed.
He is invariably called out to the bar by the man who introduced him
to the house, when they have a glass together, and in the meantime the
others escape.
The sharp will say to the victim after staying there a short time, “I
believe these men not to be honest; I’ll go and see where they have
gone, and try and get your money back.” He goes out with the pretence
of looking after them, and walks off. The victim proceeds in search of
them, and finds they have decamped leaving him penniless.
They have a very ingenious mode of finding out if the person they
accost has money in his pocket. This is done after he is introduced
into the public-house when getting a glass of ale. The second
confederate comes in invariably. The two magsmen begin to converse as
to the money they have with them. One pretends he has so much money,
which the other will dispute. They possibly appear to get very angry,
and one of them makes a bet that he can produce more money than any in
the company. They then take out their cash, and induce the stranger
to do so, to find which of them has got the highest amount. They thus
learn how much money he has in his possession.
When they find he has a sufficient sum, they adjourn to a house they
are accustomed to use for the purpose of paying the sum lost by the
wager. It generally happens the stranger has most, and wins the bet.
On arriving at this house they wish a stamped receipt for the cash.
Being a stranger he is asked as a security to leave something as a
deposit till he returns. At the same time this sharp takes out a bag of
money containing medals instead of sovereigns, or a pocket-book with
flash notes.
He soon comes back with a receipt stamp, but a dispute invariably
arises whether it will do. He suggests that some one else should go and
get one. The stranger is urged to go for one. In the same manner he
leaves money on the table as a security that he will return.