if so, to whom was it to be presented, those who were such commissioners when it was drawn, or when the bill came to the navy office? This objection they contended made the description of it as bill of exchange improper. That the instrument was not drawn to be presented for acceptance or payment by the commissioners as a bill of exchange would be, but to procure an assignment of it by virtue of the 35. G. 3. c.94, to be paid by the treasurer of the navy, from a certain fund. To this it was answered, that the intention with which this instrument was made was not material; and that it was not necessary to constitute a bill of exchange for this purpose; that the parties on whom it was drawn should be liable to accept, or even be existing persons; it was enough if the instrument purported to be drawn on a person or persons to whom it might be presented. The prisoner was found guilty, but the learned JUDGE respited the sentence till the ensuing assizes, that the question might be submitted to THE JUDGES, whether this instrument was properly described as a bill of exchange. In Easter term, 1815, THE JUDGES met and considered this case; they were of opinion that the conviction was right, that the instrument set forth in the case was in form a bill of exchange; and that the statute of the 35 G. 3. c. 94., did not prevent its being so considered, because that statute did not extend to a bill drawn by an acting lieutenant. 1815. CHISHOLM'S REX v. WILLIAM SPENCER. 1815. THE prisoner was tried and convicted before Mr. JUSTICE Embezzlement. BAYLEY, at the Warwick Lent assizes, in the year 1815, of embezzling two notes for 17. each. A mran is sufficiently a servant within the 39 G. 3. c.85., although he is only ocployed, when casionally em It appeared in evidence, that the prisoner applied to one Richard Boynton, (a carrier from Walsall to Birmingham,) to give him some employment, and that. Boynton agreed to let him carry out parcels, and go of messages, when the prisoner had no he has nothing else to do ; and it is sufficient if he was employed to receive the money he embezzled, though receiving money may not be in his usual employment, and although it was the only instance in which he was so employed. 1815. SPENCER'S other employment; for which Boynton was to give him what he should think fit. The fourth day of the prisoner's being in this employment, Boynton gave him an order upon which he was to receive 21. from Messrs. Smith and Campbell; he received the money, and embezzled it. The learned JUDGE entertained some doubt, whether the prisoner could be considered as a servant within the statute 39 G. 3. c. 85. (a) and reserved the case for the consideration of THE JUDGES. In Easter term, 1815, ALL THE JUDGES met, and held this conviction right. (b) 1815. Forgery. sary that a THE REX v. JOSIAH BOX. prisoner was tried before Mr. JUSTICE CHAMBRE (present It is not neces- Mr. BARON GRAHAM), at the Old Bailey sessions, April, 1815, on an indictment for forging a promissory note, which was as follows: "On demand, we promise to pay Mesdames Sarah Waller and Sarah Doubtfire, stewardesses for the time being of the Provident Daughter's Society, held at Mr. Pope's, the Hope, Smithfield, or their successors in office, sixty-four pounds with five per cent. so as to be the subject of an interest for the same, value received this 7th day of February, indictment for 1815. promissory forging or "£.64. "For Felex Calvirt & Co. "JOHN FORSTER." (a) Which enacts, That if any servant or clerk, or any person employed for the purpose in the capacity of a servant or clerk to any person whomsoever, shall, by virtue of such employment, receive or take into his possession any money, goods, &c. for or in the name or on the account of his master or employer, and shall fraudulently embezzle, secrete, or make away with the same, or any part thereof, every such offender shall be deemed to have feloniously stolen the same from his master or employer, for whose use and in whose name or on whose account the same was or were delivered to or taken into the possession of such servant, clerk, or other person so employed, although such money, goods, &c. was or were no otherwise received into the possession of his or their servant, clerk, or other person so employed, and every such offender being thereof convicted, shall be liable to be transported for any term not exceeding fourteen years. (b) Vide Rex v. Carr, suprà, 198. Rex v. Stock, Ryan & Moody's C. C.R. East. T. 1825. with intent to defraud Thomas Capps and George Walker,against the statute, &c. The second count was for uttering the same, knowing, &c. The third and fourth counts were similar to the two first, varying only in alleging the intent to be to defraud John Forster, whose name purports to be subscribed to the note. The fifth and sixth counts alleged the intention to be to defraud Robert Calvert, Charles Calvert, Thomas Calvert, Thomas Hotchkiss Littler, and John Forster, who were the partners composing the firm of Felix Calvert & Co. It appeared in evidence that there was a friendly society of females, such as described in the forged instrument, and that they had among themselves different offices held by certain members of the society, of whom one was governess, two others stewardesses, and they had likewise a committee. These persons continued in office half a year, and were then succeeded by others. They had some money in the funds of which 100l. 3 per cent. consols was part, which stood in the names of Capps and Walker, the two persons named in the two first counts of the indictment who were the husbands of two of the members, and were called their stockholders. The prisoner was the society's clerk, whose business it was to keep their accounts and give them his advice when required. The 100l. 3 per cent. consols, had, about the beginning of February, been sold out by Capps and Walker the stockholders, in consequence of an application for the purpose made to them by the prisoner, who falsely told them that the governess and stewardesses with the consent of the majority required them so to do, and to pay the money to him the prisoner, who was to place it in the hands of Messrs. Calvert & Co. The sale of the stock direction of the stock produced 647. and the broker by the On 7th of March, there was a meeting of the society, that being the day when those in office were to go out, and they were to be succeeded by others. The box which contained their papers was opened as was usual at that meeting, in the presence of the prisoner, when finding no security for the produce of the stock, the 1815. Box's Case. 1815. Box's Case. sale of which was then communicated, a conversation took place The forgery was clearly proved. It was objected by the prisoner's counsel that the intent to defraud was not proved, as alleged in any of the counts of the indictment. It was not to defraud Capps and Walker as laid in the two first counts, they being only the stockholders, the security not having been given to them, but to the society, and having been made subsequent to the fraud practised upon Capps and Walker. Nor was it to defraud John Forster, whose supposed signature was to charge the whole partnership, of which he was only one. Nor was it to defraud Calvert & Co. but the society. It was also objected that the firm of the supposed makers of the note being described Felex Calvirt & Co., and not Felix Calvert & Co. as it should have been, there were therefore no persons to whom that description could apply. The learned JUDGE overruled these objections. It was then further objected that the instrument set forth in the indictment, did not purport to be a negotiable promissory note, but merely an engagement to be accountable to the society to pay to such of them as should at any time be their stewardesses, the money supposed to be borrowed of the society by Calvert & Co. with interest. The counsel for the prosecution, in answer to this last objection contended that the statute 33 G. 3. c. 54. had incorporated societies of this description, and by s. 10. vested their effects in their officers, so as to enable them to take security to those officers and their successors, which might be negotiable. In answer to this, the counsel for the prisoner contended that even if the act might otherwise have that effect, it could not in this case, because by the second section (a) it is declared, that no (a) Which enacts, That all such rules, orders and regulations of such society shall be exhibited in writing to the justices of the peace in quarter sessions, in and for the county, &c. where such society shall be established, who may annul or confirm them; and after the confirmation thereof by such justices, all society shall be within the act, till regulations for their government have been confirmed and filed at the quarter sessions which had not been done here. The jury found the prisoner guilty. But the Court reserved the questions of law on the last objection for the opinion of THE JUDGES. This case was in Easter term 1815, argued before the TWELVE JUDGES, by ADOLPHUS for the prisoner, and GURNEY for the Crown, and was adjourned for further consideration. In Trinity term, 1815, THE JUDGES met and held the conviction right. They were of opinion that this note as stated in the indictment was a valid promissory note within the statute of 2 G.2. c. 25. (a) 1815. Box's Case. REX v. JAMES CARSON. 1815. need not spe cify the exact sum embez for embezzling zled. THE prisoner was tried before Mr. JUSTICE BAYLEY at the An indictment Carlisle summer assizes, in the year 1815, for embezzling money which came to his possession as the servant of William M'Call. The first count of the indictment charged, that the prisoner received into his possession and embezzled divers, to wit, two bank notes for one pound each, one bank note for two pounds, two notes for one pound each, two notes for one guinea each, and certain monies numbered, to wit, four shillings and eight sixpences. The second count charged, that the prisoner received and embezzled divers, to wit, four bank notes for one pound each, two bank notes for two pounds each, four promissory notes for one pound each, four promissory notes for one guinea each, such rules, &c. so confirmed, shall be signed by the clerk of the peace at such sessions, and a duplicate thereof deposited with him and filed with the rolls of the session there; and no society shall be within the meaning of this act until the rules, &c. shall have been confirmed and filed as aforesaid. (a) Vide Rex v. Chisholm, supra. 297. |