were of a remarkable character. Mr. Moore was a person of gentlemanly
appearance, and was a member of a highly respectable Irish family,
possessed of good means. The unfortunate young man when he came of age
received a property sufficient to have placed him in a situation above
the common rank. Naturally wild and unsettled in his disposition, he
soon became involved in all the gaieties of the metropolis of his native
country; but he ere long changed the scene of his actions to London.
Here he entered even more largely into the amusements of life; and few
years had elapsed before he had dissipated the greater part of his
possessions. The gambling-table had served in a great measure to produce
this unfortunate effect, and to the gambling-table he resorted for the
purpose of renewing those means of which it had already deprived him.
Every effort served but to plunge him deeper into difficulty; and at
length he was driven in despair to a method of retrieving his lost
fortunes which rendered him open to a prosecution for putting off forged
notes.
The circumstances proved in reference to the particular case upon which
he was first tried were these:--On the evening of the 31st of January,
the prisoner, accompanied by a gentleman who was in the habit of
visiting the billiard-rooms of a person named Cooke, at No. 358, Strand,
entered those rooms, and after a short time, sat down to play loo with a
party. He played throughout the evening with varied successes, paying
his first losses with what appeared to be genuine country bank-notes;
but when he rose to quit the room, he was in debt to Cooke, the keeper
of the house, in the sum of 30_l._ which he had advanced to him. He gave
his I.O.U. for the amount, stating his address to be "Wright's Hotel,"
Strand, and went away. In the course of the evening Cooke had given
change for nine of the notes which had been paid by the prisoner; and in
the morning he sent his wife into the city to procure cash for them at
the various banking-houses at which they purported to be payable. She
received the money for some of them; but at length, upon her presenting
a note at Messrs. Glynn and Co.'s, she was detained. She immediately
explained what she knew of the transaction; and her husband having been
sent for, he confirmed her statement, and they were liberated. On that
evening a note was taken to Mr. Cooke by the porter of the Hotel
Fricour, Leicester-square, which was written by the prisoner, in which
he expressed his regret at having disposed of notes which he had
discovered were forged; but he assured Mr. Cooke of his desire at some
future time to repay him what he had lost, saying, that he had received
the notes on the day before from a school-fellow in payment of a bet
upon a race which he had won some time before. Cooke, accompanied by
Forrester, the city officer, who had been engaged to trace the prisoner,
immediately proceeded to the hotel from which the letter was dated, and
found the prisoner in the coffee-room. They directly took him into
custody, and he made no effort to escape or to deny the guilt imputed to
him.
Subsequent inquiries proved that the notes which the prisoner had put
off were genuine impressions of the plates prepared for the various
banking companies, by whom they purported to have been issued, but all
that part of them which gave them the character of genuine instruments,
including the signature of the director, was forged. The exact means by
which these impressions had come into the possession of the prisoner was
a mystery; but upon application to Messrs. Perkins and Co. of
Fleet-street, who had prepared the plates, it was elicited that it was
their custom to send out to the various country banking firms proof
impressions of the plates which they had engraved as specimens of their
work. The notes uttered by the prisoner were of this character, and they
bore upon them evidence of the employment of great ingenuity in their
preparation. The specimen notes were invariably issued, pasted upon
card-board of considerable thickness; it appeared that the notes in
question had been removed from the card-board, but being of insufficient
substance, by reason of their being impressions on India paper, a piece
of paper of the ordinary quality used in the genuine notes had been
placed upon the backs of them so as to give them all the appearance of
the notes in common circulation. The signatures appended to them did not
appear to have been copied from any of the original notes; and in some
instances, indeed, names had been employed entirely dissimilar to those
of any of the directors of the bank.
Mr. C. Phillips, who was retained as counsel for the prisoner, addressed
the jury on his behalf, urging that in truth he had no intention which
was actually dishonest, and suggesting that the unfortunate man having
been deprived of his property by gamblers, had sought to recover it back
again by means, undoubtedly dishonest, but scarcely more blameable than
those which had been employed by those by whom he had been fleeced. He
was informed that it was by no means uncommon for flash notes to be
employed by persons connected with gambling-houses, as a means of
decoying their prey; and he asked whether, in truth, the prisoner had
been guilty of anything more dishonest. The absence of all evil
intention had been plainly shown in the immediate notice which he had
given of the notes which he had put off being fictitious, and this at
least was a point in the case which entitled him to some consideration.
The jury returned a verdict of "Guilty," but recommended the prisoner to
mercy upon the ground suggested by the learned counsel.
The prisoner was then indicted upon a second charge, of uttering two
notes of the respective amounts of 5_l._ and 10_l._, with intent to
defraud the Boston Bank.
The means employed by the prisoner in putting off these notes were very
similar to those which he had used in the former case. The offence was
alleged to have been committed on the 28th of January; and it appeared
that on that night the prisoner went to a notorious gambling-house
situated at No. 7, Leicester-square, kept by a person named Thompson,
and demanded to know whether there was any play, and what bank there
was. He was informed that the bank contained 130_l._, and Chappell, the
attendant in the rooms, offered to play with him, in default of there
being any one else there. They played, and in a short time Chappell won
70_l._, which the prisoner paid in what appeared to be country
bank-notes, of various denominations. The prisoner declared that he had
no more money left then; but asked whether, if he went for some more,
the rooms would be open when he returned. He was answered in the
affirmative, and in about fifteen minutes he went back. At this time
Thompson, the keeper of the rooms was there, and the prisoner having
played again, by about four o'clock in the morning he had lost 75_l._
more, which he also paid in notes of the same description as those which
he had before put off. He said he would fetch more money, if the rooms
would be open; but Thompson expressed some unwillingness to allow any
more play, as the usual time for closing the house had passed. The
prisoner, however, went away and returned, but he found the door closed.
He appeared angry and excited, and insisted upon having his revenge, and
Chappell at length let him in. By nine o'clock in the morning he had
lost 380_l._ in addition to the sums which he had previously paid; and
he handed over a Manchester bank-post bill for 300_l._, and another for
80_l._, and then he went away. In the course of the day Thompson and
Chappell went into the city to procure change of the country notes, and
they obtained cash for some of them, which were not payable in London,
at a bullion-dealer's in Cheapside, upon the deduction of two and a half
per cent.; but upon their presenting some others at the banking-houses
at which they were payable, they were taken into custody. They explained
their characters and the manner in which they had obtained the notes,
and were set at liberty. When the prisoner was taken into custody, a
letter was found on his person addressed to Thompson, which, it
appeared, he was about to despatch to that individual, in which he
declared that he had just discovered that he had been imposed upon, and
had paid him with forged notes, but offered to give him bills of
exchange for the amount which he owed him, at various dates.
The defence in this case was the same as that which had been before put
forward, and the inquiry was attended with a similar result,--the
conviction of the prisoner.
Mr. Justice Coltman, who was the presiding judge, in passing sentence
upon the prisoner, remarked that his offence was materially aggravated
by the station in society which he had held, and the education which he
had received. In a commercial country, where so much depended upon the
proper maintenance of the public securities, forgery could not be looked
at as a slight offence. In this case the safety of the commercial
transactions of the country might have been peculiarly affected, and a
severe example was called for. His lordship then sentenced the prisoner
to be transported for fifteen years.
PATRICK MAXWELL STEWART WALLACE; AND MICHAEL SHAW STEWART WALLACE.
TRANSPORTED FOR INCITING A PERSON TO CAST AWAY AND DESTROY A MERCHANT
SHIP.
The crime of these prisoners was of a most heinous description, and
fully entitled them to receive that measure of punishment which, by the
sentence of the court, they were directed to undergo. They were persons
of respectable origin and connexions, and had for some time carried on
business in the city of London as merchants. They were tried at the
Central Criminal Court, at the March sessions, 1841, on a charge of
inciting one Edmund Loose to cast away the ship Dryad.
The indictment contained twenty-six counts and charges: First--"That one
Edmund Loose, late of London, mariner, on the 10th of November, in the
third year of her present Majesty's reign, being the captain of a
certain vessel called the Dryad, the property of Alexander Howden and
others, did, with force and arms, upon the high seas, within the
jurisdiction, &c., feloniously, unlawfully, and maliciously, cast away
and destroy the said vessel, with intent thereby to prejudice the said
Alexander Howden and another, against the form of the statute in such
case made and provided; and further, that Patrick Maxwell Stewart
Wallace, late of London aforesaid, before the said felony was committed
in form aforesaid, namely, on the 1st of August in the year aforesaid,
did feloniously and maliciously incite, move, procure, aid, counsel,
hire, and command the said Edmund Loose the said felony, in manner and
form aforesaid, to do and commit, against the form of the statute in
such case made and provided, against the peace, &c.; and further that
Michael Shaw Stewart Wallace, late of London aforesaid, before the said
felony was committed, &c., did feloniously and maliciously incite, &c.,
the said Edmund Loose the said felony in manner and form aforesaid, to
do and commit, against the form of the statute," &c.
Second count--The same as the first, but without naming the owner of the
vessel.
Third count--Stated the intention of the prisoners to have been to
prejudice and defraud Pedro de Zulueta, and others, the owners of
certain goods, laden and being in and on board the said vessel,
belonging to Alexander Howden and others.
Fourth count--The same as the third, but omitting the name of the owner
of the vessel.
The other counts stated the said Edmund Loose's intention to be, to
prejudice and defraud various individuals, and that the prisoners did
feloniously and maliciously incite the said Edmund Loose to commit the
said felonies.
The proceedings commenced on Wednesday the 3d of March, when Mr. Jervis,
as counsel for the prisoners, took an objection to the proceedings.
Edmund Loose, who was charged as the principal felon, did not appear to
plead, and he contended, that it was incompetent for the court to try
the prisoners upon the indictment, alleging them to be accessories only
in the absence of Loose. He admitted that they might be tried for a
substantive felony, but that was not the nature of the offence alleged.
The Attorney-general contended that, by the Act 7th Geo. IV. chap. 64,
sect. 9, the accessories could be tried in the absence of the principal
felon.
After some further discussion, the court ruled that the prisoners could
be tried for a substantive felony, according to the statute, and that
they might proceed upon the present indictment; but he left the question
open, so that the prisoners might have the advantage of a more full
consideration of the point.
The Attorney-general then elected to proceed separately with the trials
of the two prisoners, and the case of Patrick Maxwell Stewart Wallace
was determined to be taken first. The evidence produced in the two
cases, however, was exactly similar, and the statement of the facts
proved in one of them only will be sufficient to put our readers in
possession of all that was material to the inquiries.
The evidence was divided into two classes, the first of which referred
to the conduct of the two prisoners in procuring excessive policies of
insurance to be effected upon the ship and cargo; while the second
related to the demeanour of Loose, the captain of the Dryad, on her
voyage, from which it was sought to prove that he had wilfully cast away
the vessel.
With reference to the first part of the case, it was shown that the
Dryad was a brig, of which one-fourth share belonged to Messrs. Howden
and Ainslie, ship-brokers, while the remaining three-fourths were the
property of the prisoner Michael Wallace. The latter had purchased his
share of a Mr. Gillespie in the year 1838, for 1600_l._; and the vessel
after that was docked and rendered a first-class ship, an outlay of
600_l._ having been made upon her. In July 1839, the Dryad was chartered
to Messrs. Zulueta and Co., merchants of Liverpool, for a voyage from
that port to Santa Cruz, for 300_l._: Michael Wallace acted as ship's
husband, and he directed Messrs. Howden and Ainslie to effect policies
of insurance upon the vessel in 2200_l._, and upon the freight in
300_l._ These policies were accordingly effected in the office of the
Marine Insurance Company. In the same month, however, other policies
were effected in respect of the same ship by directions of the two
Wallaces. In the Alliance Insurance Company, a policy for 715_l._ was
effected on goods; in the General Maritime Insurance Company, a policy
for 1265_l._ was likewise effected on goods; in the Neptune Insurance
Company, a policy of 700_l._ was effected on the ship and outfit, and a
policy of 687_l._ on goods; in the Mutual Marine Insurance Company, a
policy was effected on goods; and another policy for 650_l._ was also
effected by Messrs. Bahr and Bearing, of Liverpool. Independently of
these policies, an insurance to the amount of 3000_l._ was also effected
by Messrs. Zulueta and Co. at Lloyd's, in respect of the cargo which
they sent out by the vessel. The total amount, therefore, insured upon
the Dryad and her cargo was 10,117_l._; of which, deducting the value of
Messrs. Zulueta's policy, and of that effected by Messrs. Howden and
Ainslie, 6617_l._ stood in the names of the prisoners--a sum far
exceeding the real worth of their interest in the vessel and her cargo.
The Dryad having arrived at Liverpool, Messrs. Zulueta proceeded to load
her with such goods as they wished her to convey to Santa Cruz. About
three hundred tons were put on board, and on the 7th of September the
vessel sailed from port. When she had gone, the prisoner Michael Wallace
informed Stott, an agent whom he had employed, that he had put some
goods of his own on board, although it would have been contrary to his
agreement with Messrs. Zulueta if he had done so. In January 1840, a
claim was sent in to the various insurance offices for the amount of the
policies effected as for a total loss of the Dryad. Some conversations
took place between Patrick Wallace and Stott, in which the former made
use of expressions which seemed to imply that Loose, the captain, had
purposely lost the ship, but the greater part of the insurances were
paid to the two brothers, and placed to their accounts at the
banking-houses where they usually deposited their money. The return of
some of the seamen of the Dryad to London, subsequently enabled the
parties to the policies to obtain evidence confirmatory of suspicions
which they had entertained with regard to the loss of the Dryad; and in
the month of November 1840, Patrick Wallace was taken into custody. His
brother, Michael, at that time was living in Tredegar-square,
Commercial-road; but upon inquiries being made for him, he was found to
have absconded, and his house was discovered furnished throughout, but
abandoned by its occupants. On the 16th of December, however, Michael
was also secured, having been found living in a small row of houses in
the outskirts of Lancaster, whither, according to his own account, he
had gone that he might not be called upon to give testimony against his
brother.
The evidence for which it was sought to prove that the Dryad had been
wilfully cast away, a fact which, it may be observed, was necessary to
be shown as an ingredient of the offence charged against the prisoners,
was as follows:--