the case. If, however, the jury would dismiss from their minds all previous impressions, he flattered himself that if they were not satisfied of the prisoner's innocence, they would at least be of opinion that there was not sufficient evidence to convict him. He did not impeach the testimony of any one single witness in the case, but he protested most solemnly against the inferences which they had drawn. He begged the jury would look into and carefully consider all the facts of this case, which he believed was unparalleled in the annals of criminal jurisprudence. He would take the circumstances of the case singly. First, there were the lucifer matches, which were found under the prosecutor's bed. They, however, were not proved to be the property of the prisoner. Then, there was the razor found in the yard. There was nothing in the case to show that that razor belonged to the prisoner; but, on the contrary, the evidence went directly the other way. Then, there were the stockings found in the brewhouse. They, again, were not shown to be the prisoner's; and if they had been, it would not have helped the case for the prosecution, as there were no marks of blood upon them. As to the curtain, the jury would see it, and form their own opinion upon the marks said to be produced by blood. Then, again, stress had been laid upon the fact that the candle of the prisoner had burnt out. He would ask the jury, several of whom might be in the habit of burning a rushlight, whether they never let the candle burn out at an inn? Besides, there was no evidence to show that the candle had not been burnt out before the prisoner went to bed. Next, as to

the slops contained in the chamber vessel. The experiments which had been made were performed the day after this transaction, and no evidence had been produced on the part of the prosecution to show that they were in the same state as they were on the 20th. The next part of the case was the alarm. Now, it was proved that Mr. and Mrs. Cooke and Mary Fowkes were the first persons down, and they gave no evidence of the state of any of the doors except that leading into the yard. Any one, therefore, for all that appeared, might have entered the house and gone away again by one of the other doors. Then, as to the state of the passage, it appeared that on the alarm being given, Mr. Cooke and Mr. Crawford, who were first in the prosecutor's room, went twice along the passage, and also that the door of No. 19, in which Mr. Crawford slept, was stained in three or four places with blood. All the inferences, therefore, which had been directed against the prisoner from the state of the passage, might as well attach to the occupier of the bedroom No. 19; but it was said, that there was a mark of blood on the floor between the carpet and the door of No. 20. Now, if Mr. Crawford, after he had seen the prosecutor and returned to his own room for bandages, had in his hurry gone a little further than his own doorand the jury would observe that the door of No, 20 was only two feet off-all this might be easily explained. This supposition was certainly consistent with the fact, that not a single drop of blood was found inside the room; and he would ask them by what magic it was that the dropping of the blood stopped the very moment the pri

soner entered his room? As to the mark, such as it was, on the curtain, it might have been made by Mary Fowkes, or the constable, both of whom had been, for a long time, in the prosecutor's bedroom, which was stained with blood in every part. But then it was said, that opposite the prisoner's window was found a razor. This, as he had already said, was not proved to belong to the prisoner, and there was nothing to show that that window had been opened, while it was proved that the window of the passage was open at six o'clock; that a stain of blood was on it, and that it was possible to throw the razor to the place where it was found from that window. With regard to the missing napkin, nothing was more probable, when a number of persons were called out of bed at four in the morning, that, in the hurry and alarm, the napkin might have been taken from the prisoner's room to stanch the blood of the prosecutor's wounds. It was suggested on the part of the prosecution, that he had washed the blood off his hands with this napkin; but what time had he for that purpose? He was seen about by different persons from the time of the alarm till six o'clock. When, therefore, was the alum dissolved, the hands washed, the shirt stains removed? That being the case, let the jury ask themselves whether it was possible to inflict such a wound in the dark, as that by which the prosecutor suffered, without the hands being covered with blood. Again, the marks of blood on his shirt were not on the front, as they might have been expected to be, if he had been the assailant, but upon the back. It should be recollected also, that when the wound of the prosecutor

was sewed up, the prisoner was standing at the foot of the bed. Looking, therefore, at all these circumstances, and remembering the excellent maxim of Lord Hale, that it was better that ninety-nine guilty persons should escape than that one innocent man should suffer, he trusted that the jury would regard the position of the prisoner with the eyes which charity, justice, religion, and the law required, and give him the benefit of any reasonable doubt which existed in their minds.

Mr. Baron Gurney, in summing up the evidence, told the jury that the difficulty of the case was presented by this question-If that was blood which went on the pri soner's shirt and had been washed out, did it come from the wounded man when the wound was dressed, or at the time when the wound was inflicted? But the next step was, perhaps, the most important in the case, which related to the bloody razor. The circumstance of the razor being found in the neighbourhood of the house so soon after the commission of the act, afforded the strongest presumption that it was the weapon with which the wound was inflicted, and that it must have been thrown there from the house. It was found opposite the window of the prisoner's room, and it might have been thrown there by the prisoner either from that window or from the window in the passage, although the window of the prisoner's bedroom would have been the most convenient place. Now came the part of the case which, in conjunction with the razor, pressed most heavily against the prisoner. The question was, by whom could the act have been done, unless by him? It was difficult, if not impossible, to be

lieve that the act was done by any person outside the house; the house had not been broken open, and the person, whoever he was, must have been in Mackreth's bedroom, which did not appear to have been forced. In connexion with this part of the case, it was not unimportant to observe, that before this deed was done the prisoner, being in a state of destitution, had made inquiries about a person who he knew had money. It was shown also, that at Ludlow he went to the Angel under the pretence of being a passenger by the Red Rover, thus obtaining a ready access to the house. No suggestion had been made of any innocent motive which could have authorized that part of the prisoner's conduct which was immediately previous to this transaction. The jury, however, would take the whole case into their consideration, and if they entertained any reasonable doubt of the prisoner's guilt, they would find him not guilty; but if, on the other hand, they were satisfied that his was the hand which committed the act charged in the indictment, they would not hesitate to return such a verdict as justice demanded.

The jury retired to consider their verdict, and after an absence of about half an hour returned into court, and stated, that they found the prisoner Guilty.

The learned Judge passed upon him sentence of death, which sentence was carried into effect on the 3rd April. [See Chronicle.]

SURREY ASSIZES, Aug. 16.

BOGLE V. LAWSON. This was an action for libel brought by Allan George Bogle, late a partner in a banking-house at Florence, against the Proprie

tors of "the Times" newspaper. The circumstances which gave rise to this action are so extraordinary and so important to the commercial credit of Europe, that the case deserves very especial notice. As the action was necessarily tried upon the legal question of libel, and the case is so encumbered with technical difficulties, that an abstract of the evidence could give but insufficient information, it has been thought better to give a short history of the circumstances, than to present it in the usual form.

In the month of May last, the correspondents of the Times addressed a letter to the editor, which was published in that journal, stating "that a great forgery company established on the Continent had been lately detected and blown up, and that the object of the company was to plunder the continental bankers by the means of forged letters of credit purporting to be of the banking firm of Glyn, Halifax, Mills, and Co., of London:" the letter then went on to give the names of the conspirators, and among others included the name of the plaintiff Bogle.

Previously, however, to entering into any summary of this deeply ramified conspiracy, it may not be unnecessary to repeat that the plot had for its object the plunder of the principal of the European bankers; and that the purpose and intent of the conspirators were to rob these gentlemen of about 1,000,000l. sterling, and having achieved their daring purpose, the robbers were then, by different routes, to effect their escape to America, India, Algiers, or Egypt, as might be agreed on. It was proposed to accomplish this gigan tic fraud by the forgery of "let tres circulaires," or what are

ordinarily termed "circular letters of credit." These are obtained from the principal bankers, either for a sum certain, as for instance 500l., drawn on stamps in any given amount the payee requires, or a particular credit of 2000l. or 5000l., is demanded, for which the traveller or payee gives value or security in London, and for which he draws in such amount from abroad and at such places as his necessities require. Tens of thousands of these circular letters are issued yearly by the different bankers, both in the city and the west end, for sums varying from 100l. to 10,000%. They are all as to the wording very similar in substance, though they differ occasionally, not only in collocations of phrase, but in modes of expression. They are all, moreover, engraved in blank, leaving spaces for the number of the letter, for the name of the bearer of it or payee, for the amount of the credit, and for the signature of the bankers.

The particular banking-house in London whose name was forged in the present foul transaction was the firm of Glyn, Halifax, Mills, and Co. The letters of credit of this firm are engraved very much in the usual fashion, on a thick paper, somewhat longer than the paper in use either by the late house of Hammersley, or by Herries, Couts, or the generality of the west-end bankers. Affixed to the letters, or rather stamped on them, are the initials of the firm. neath this is a blank space for the payments, which are marked off as they are made on the continent, until the letter of credit is entirely exhausted. Annexed to, and forming a part of, the letter, are the names of the principal towns in Europe, beginning with Abbeville VOL. LXXXIII.

Be

we

will proceed to show how this design was put into execution. Two ideas it is presumed suggested themselves to the prime movers in this nefarious affair: the first and cardinal one was, that they should enlist among their number a continental banker who had possession of some old circular letters of the house of Glyn and Co., and who could sub rosa aid them with the benefit of his counsel and experience, as well as with one of the genuine letters: the second was, that some one among themselves should come to London, should lodge a given sum with the house of Glyn and Co., should obtain in lieu thereof a circular letter of credit, whereby plates for the engraved portion might be struck off, and a seal or stamp be fabricated, with a view to impress the document with the dry stamp or initials of the company, which appeared thus in alto-relievo on the letter, "G., H., M., and Co." conspirators in such a gigantic scheme as this could not be men from that class among which the perpetrators of frauds are usually found; accordingly the chiefs were men moving in a very high class of society and some account of them is necessary. The society of Florence is composed of, beside the aristocracy of the country, families of high rank of every country in Europe: of these some

2 A

The

are of most unimpeachable honour and respectability, others of broken fortunes and of questionable reputation; but among all the characters resident within the dominions of the Grand Duke there were none so remarkable as the Marquess de Bourbel, and Cunningham Graham of Gartmore. Of the family of De Bourbel little is with certainty known, He has said himself that it was like the family of Barras "old as the rocks of Provence." We believe it, however, to be true that the Bourbels were gentillards," or small gentry of Normandy, and that the immediate ancestor of the present M. de Bourbel filled some subordinate situation in the suite of the late Marquess of Hastings when that lamented nobleman was Governor-General of India. Be this, however, as it may, it is certain that M. de Bourbel entered life with no ordinary advantages; and while yet young became attached to the embassy of that excellent man, M. Hyde de Neuville, then Ambassador of France to his most faithful Majesty the King of Portugal. He was afterwards attached to the French embassy at Copenhagen, but left the capital of Denmark previous to his duel with M. Haidé, a gentleman of Greek extraction, in which the latter fell.

Subsequent to his fatal encounter with M. Haidé, he was looked upon as a gambler, duellist, and roué; and it is known ultimately became a member of the Secret French Police. He was a man of very great accomplishments, spoke several languages, exhibited much taste, was an excellent draughts man; rode, fenced, boxed, and intrigued, and was universally looked on as a specious, agree

able, but thoroughly mauvais sujet.

Early in 1838 he eloped from Florence, either with his wife's maid or an opera dancer, and his unfortunate wife, an Englishwoman, whom he had married for her fortune, died in childbirth, broken-hearted by her calamities, afew months after. Public indignation was now strongly expressed, and De Bourbel, yielding to its force, retired with his family to the Villa Micali, a country house near to Leghorn, on the Florence-road. While here De Bourbel did not remain in perfect seclusion. His solitude was occasionally interrupted by the visits of a remarka ble man,one Cunningham Graham, formerly of Gartmore in Scotland, but, then, an exile from his home and country.

Of ancient family and good estate, Graham had not only tarnished the fame of his ancestors, but had improvidently squandered the large inheritance which had descended to him. He left Scotland to avoid his creditors some time in the year 1828, and proceeded to Brussels, and after residing at several places, finally took up his residence at Florence. Graham was a man of considerable accomplishments, but withal cool, crafty, designing, and thoroughly unprincipled. He had a refined taste in the fine arts, had read much, and improved a memory naturally tenacious by use and exercise. It was, however, in the imitative and mechanical arts that he pre-eminently excelled. Au excellent turner and mechanician, he formed and fashioned the tools which he afterwards used with surpassing ingenuity; and thus enabled to trace not only copies of the rarest engravings of