Middlesex Sessions, Monda...
heosession1s commence to-day, before F. COatST, Esq., Chirma1-n, and a bench of Alaglstnates. TUE KXXIG, AT T5FE Pfl0SECUTtoT OF 3OSEPIt WILFRED PARKXN58, V. GEORGE HI& GENTLEMAN. l'lr. A13'OL?HUs opened thle indictment, whichchgeted- fendnt,Geore (ick, together withi two Other persons, not. present, (natsEiy, tire lion. anda Rev.iEdw. Finch and Thorgas P. WVollaston), with having defrauded the prosecuitor, Mr. rarkins, of the suim of 63,0001., by inducing hinii to purchase ans annuity, whichn theyre Presentedl to be securcjl upon certain livings in WVarwickesbire, of which the incumbrances were to be paid off; and also upon a certafn re'al estate. in the sam-e county, in the possession of the Rev. Air. Finch whereas, in point of fact, he possessRed no real estate, and had never paidl offhe incurnbrance xupon the livings. There we-re 14 covunts in the indictment, settigogroth the charge in diffrent forma. AIr. ALLrEY. stated the case to the jury, and simply detailed the facts sworn to b the following witnesses. Mir. Jor4epht Vilfred Parkins was the firit witness examined. Air. ALLEY asked him if he liad been ac4axainted with the de- fendant -Ricks,- hits answer was..." Yes, Sir, I have had that mis- fortuine." Mr. GtR'EYgy whie wa-s of collisnst. for the defendant, here inter- fered, and said."' WVe niuat not have such a remTark: aL witness is bound to answer, anid not to five a colouring b-y a comnment." TLhe witne-;-" I wa:,nt no incivility, Sir." Air'. Gun ~...Y l'h nen de niot provoke it," Wlithess.1" I 'beg I shtall have no intereuption." Mir, G''--y- You Shall hiaye hone from mie, unless you pro- vonke ityore' The CUAI~5 -."our best way is simnply to answer the Mr. ADO- potto iou, and abstain from comment." fore ~~LP1{U5."gbeggod of you to do so, Mr. ?arkins, be- Theexainaionof Alr Parkins was then resumed, lHe Said thatbe wa acuaited with the defendant Hticks at the end Gf 1817, or ginin of1118: h e was introdluced to himn by AMr. Wollaston. who usd eenformrly ngaed at Hiereford in thle business of his Grc h ae Duk t Norf'olk. Ile introucd himii to witness in -yepr.Art t at fitst interview WVellastoni stated that Hick-s wasagentleman of fa%bion, family, and fortune, a solicitor of greatt etirinence, and in expectati0ion a having 14e,01101 Hicks soon wvent away,- andl theni Mollnaton saidt the same thing over ag,ain. A dlay or two after thiev called on hijn to look at his horses in Riding.house-lane: sufisequently Wollaston proposed that he (klfr. Patkins) should a ppoint Air. Hlicks to be his solicitor. They dined togethier. Sir H enry Tempest, a clergyman, an officer nameel Graham, santi some ladies, were of the parry. He had repeated invitations to meet the satire parties both at Hicksq's, andi at Hope-bill, near Steines. Triey often talked of modney mat.. lers, and, of mnakivg Hicks an agent for leuiding money on annuities. l-11ic diapproved of laying oat his mnoney that way, but was at leng'h Prevaled pon. to do so. The securities were represenlted as being very good. The defenda?nts sPecificallY PmOP-d to0pay ofrannuities upon the estate of the fi-on, and Rev. Edward Finch M Ar. Hicks s,aid he had heard 31 r. Finch wanted to rais' oe,t a offsome int-umbraneces upon church livings, and a small freehold estate and thrat the security was a very desirableone. WVitness again expressed a disinclination~ to lend his mioney on those terms; they (def'endi- ants), however, afterwardswvent to visit the property, andgave avery favouirable account of it. This representation induceld hini to ad. Vance 6,0001. upon %.n annuity thui secured of 6941. That was tire amnount. of the i:rcumnbra:rces previously on the e-state, which that 6,0001. was to pay off; and Hicks took him to a place called the En- rolment-office, as hIs attorney, where he. examined soine books, and said that thtre was no fuirther incumbrance upon tire estate. \rirsdid nor look, at the hooks himself, aseetrl ofddi Hficks. Hel then left towln, leaving -a chiesk for 6,0001., to be re- ceived when the title-deeds were ready. The check wras not paid bec-ause the deeds were noL. forthicoming, and that directioni was ex- presed on the lace of' the chieck, whichi was since dlestroyed. On his return to town, he saw Hickcs and Wollaston who said ithe banker-s would not part withi the money, although tbrey had offered to give them the dleedis. Ile was surprised at this informationx, an'd he then gave them another clieck, withocut stipuilat.irig any condi- tions. There was then to be a deed execuited by Mlr. Keates, Mlr. Spriug. andNMr. Lloyd Graharn. Sprin.g's wastobeL~ODI., Grahiam's the sarne,Weare and two others90001., 1r. Clov'eaf6O0l., r..Harkinis6i0l., and someoti iesq,rmaking the total of 6,0001. He afterwardlsmet at Mlr. Hick:s's WVollaston an( they went and got six 1,0001. Bank-notes in pyment of the check. XWitness at thatttime received tire d(es, and 2clivered the money into the hands of Mir. Finch, Who Was pTreent. IThe deeds which Nlr. parkints received were thlen put in and proved.I He afterwards lef't the room,. as Mr. flicks said he had some private arrangemi-ents to make with I Dr. Finc'h. They af'terwards dined together. He left the whole matter in the hiands of Mir. Hicks, and had received a part of ttire annuity, except 2,0001. or 3,0001.. by a claim on the estate of the late Hienry Finch, who was a collateral security.- Croscs-examined by AIr. (5uraN~Ey.-.Tltere was now 2,0001L or 3,0001. due to himn, i)v arrears of the annuity and insurance The annuity, exclusive ef the insurance amount, was paid up to laxt. De- cember. IIe liad heardl that Ai r. Finch was in thte Isle of France. 3,2941. had been paid to him last spring on the accounnt, out of thle produce of the estate of the late HenrY Finch. The first check for the 6,0001. was returned to him, as lirehad mentioned, and he then fgave an ordinary check, wliich was Paid. He had no other transac- tions abont threse deeds than he hand mentioned. A paper was here banded to Air. Parkios, whichir le said was not. his hiandwriting, although he believed the signature was. fHe could not recollect that ttris was tire receipt he gave hist own bankers for the deedsi, whien he deposited) them. This was certainly, upon recollection, his signature; but he could ntot swear he had ever given this recei ~o the banikers- he would not swear eithier one way, or tire othier. U a~ afterwards ad- mitted that this was the first document whiceh he had sent to the bankers, and wiiich hadl not been paid; he had thought it was destroyed. H-e was positive lie paid the money him- self to Air. Finchi in Hicks's private office. Hie repeated ttirat be had a generAl reptugnance to deal in annuity transactions, when he was first spoken to about .Mr. Finchi's business. Last Juine, and before t1iis indictment, he had Air. Hicks arrested on a Saturday upon another indictment fagr the same business. Bail was offered on thle Satalrday, hut he insisted upo)n notice until Alon. ,day, and there beilng a dlefect in the indictment, he hiad it removed into thle Coui t of K~jing's lench. He would not swear that he hiad thrreatenred to bring a civil action apainst Hicks ; he mnightt have said so, but wouldi not speak positively. He remnainedi on good terms with H-icks until June, 1620, when there was a mqeeting of' Ai)r. Fitnch's creditors. Up to that timne he was unaware Hicksq had defrauded him ; he became convinced by degrees only, but hie could not., after all mentioni the precise date whe he found blnr out, for hre had other charges besides this against himn. An attorney accompa- nied witness to Coventry in 182, and it wvas arranged that in tire coach they shouldI seern to be strangers to each other, and they had settled that the attorney shouild watch the conversation with Hicks, whVo was. to hlave accninpanied him in thne coach, but who on the day sent an apology by his clerk to the office. Time reason he wished nort to be recognized by the other attorney was, to avoid giving umbrage to Mir. Hicks. He might Irave coninued to eheave civilly to the defendant so late as ttire month of December, 1820, and have writter to him in the termns" Dear Siy ;` a man might write so to a pf: so? who dii1 not deserve the courtesy ; that wouldi depend upon it cumst.,nces. Re-examrineid by Mlr. ADOLPHS'er.-.His busineass at Coventry -was to attend a meeting of .Mr. Finch, tire annuity granter's credi- tors: he had arranged that 31r. Hlicks shouldI accompanY trim in the sta,ce-coach. Up to the time o f starting, he expected Mlr. Hlicks's companv on the journey, although he was not without some doubts about it, and it. was therefore that. le wished to engage the othier ynun,r solicitor alluded to. Thie CreA1RasAqN asked in what way did the counsel for the in. dictment meani to rest a case of fraud, after thieir principal wpitness bacd been heardl. Mr. ALLEY said that he wvas in a condition to prove the morrey to have been obtained up on false pretences.-It had been represenited by the defendant (Mlr. H1icks) to Alr. Parkins, thattlhe 6,01001.which he had advanced upon the annuity, was to be applied in reduction of a number of smaller annuitznts wvho had before a lien upon the property. And he had evidleoce to show that. when the annuity money was given, these olcd annuities stJil remnained unpaid. .llr. ADOLPHUSe put in and read a letter from Air. Hicks to Mlr. Thorp e, his clerk, which desired the clerk to hasten for Dr. Batyp or I-looper, to attendA iIrs. Hicks, whio was seriously ladle. posed, arid to accompany Mr. Parking on a jouirney to C~oventry, about the annuity busin'ess, as lie could not attend lifm according to p)ronmise, ow,ing to his wif'e's indis,position. The learned counsel paid that thTere were othier letters written by Air. I-licks to show iris desire to get Ailr. Parkins to advance the mnoney "1to be secured upon considerable landed property in Warwickshire," ishen tire fact provecd to be that thte only security was the inicumbency upo)n the livings. He would call forther witnesses to show how th~e lacts really stood. The CseA rnem.ts bad no objection to hear the other witnesses, if they couldi carry the case farther. James Doincomhe proved the annuity deed delivered ore the part of the Hon. E. Finch to Mvr. Parkins. There waa no landed pro. perry distinct from the rectory and vicarage assigned in the deed. AIr, GtRNtEv.-ARd is not that lande-d property P Air. Parkins was again examined by Air. Gur,-sEsy.-He said lie had this car only insured Alir. PFinch's life. HowSZ,oyou Make out tbat ther'e is nonve between 2,0001. and 3,0001. due to you oln account. of arrears of annuity ?-Yes, with insiurance. Now make it out, as the anrault,~ you have said, was paid up to last December ?-I calculate the risk I have incurred, and what I ahould hiave bad to paY for insurance, had he been in this country Hiow much have you paid for insurance ?-.About 2001.y OGcorge Keates, of' Howland..street, wag next examined. He had not broughlt With h-Im the deed of annuity with Air. Finch, although he had promised to do so. The deeds now handed to him were the -incumbent ones, wliich he lent ro AMr. Hicks about three years ago, to show to MVr. Parkins, 85 ire unhierstood. The witness held the deeds as a collaterai security, and theyvwere not. returned to him by Mlr. Hicks. He hiad claime, by titie..aeeds on Air Finch: he had not brought them with him into court, and' certainly would not go home to bring them. (A laugh.) John Weave, of Chapel..strect, Grosvenor_square coal-merchant, knew Air. Hicks; but did not know the Rev. Ed. pinch. Hfe pro-) diiced a title-deed. in 1816.M1r. Hicks's partner delivered this; deed, after tr-ansacting sorne business for Iriim. He proved Mlr. Hicks's htnd-N9vriting is a witness to the deed. He had received somne pay. !trea,ts on this arnuitj'. but there was a great srearen still due upon it fur 6 years. In 1818 there was somne talk by M'tr. ik Mabout" was not paid off' -- - I.A Thomas Carr, of Devonsbire-street, Portland.place proved that Air. Hicks had transacted some annuity business for hIim conjointly wit], the last witness in the rIced put in; their annuity had never been paid off on the part of Air. Finch. iJr. Sherrard, conveyancer, of John-street, Fitzroy .quare re- mnembered a conversation in the autumn of 1818 with Mir. flieks. Tire latter said he had some dealings with the" Eortunate Youth," the term by whiclh he designated A r. Parkins. (A laugh.) It was, he said for 6,0001., but he had entered into a speculation which pre- vented him from paying off tie whole of the annuities. The case for thre pr0secutiou was here closed. 3A1r. OuNEY ased the Chairitan whether any case had been made out, which imposed upon him the task of making a reply on the part of the defendant. The CuAIRDIAM wished to inow if the counsel for the plainti'ff meant to press the matter still farther. hlr. ALLEY said, that in his opinion there was a question to go before a jury. He mhrst deny that the security promised to Afr. Parkins was the same which had been actually given ; he was prg- mised a litn upon church property and upon landed estate; it was for the jury to say whether what he had ultimately obtained vwas that for which he had specifically bargained, and whe- tlher the dilFerence between the one and the other did not establisb the fact that bis attorney had violated the confidence reposed in him by his cient. There weas to have been landed property besides glebe lapds, and where wee it? Air. ADOX.Peus followed at the strae side, and r.id tbit there were two allegations recited on the record. Two species of prpezty were held out as the inducement to advance the money, and only one appeared. It was for the jury to say if there had been a fraudu- lent intention. The CHAIRnMAX said that Air. Gnrney had better proceed. Alr. usRtEy then addressed the jury for the defendant. Hre said that he had intrusted to his care, the character of a vcry yoUng tuan in his profession, which character had, uintil this case, never.bbecn, as was admitted by Alr. Alley, tainted in the smallest degree. The d-ftendant was now for the first time charged with the heinous crime of committing a deliberate fraud upon his client-of having obtained from him a large sum of money upon fraudulent pretenres, and having betrayed the trust which Xhad been professionally imposed on himn. What a contrast did not the enormnity of the charge present, with the paucity of of. fence adducedin the attempt to give it support ! fle would at once, on the part Of the defendant, deny tthat le had been instrumental in committing any fraud himself. and go farther, and say that no fraudl whatever had, from the beginniing to this stage of the transaction, been corimittel upon Mr. P.irkins. Both as respected the person, as well as the thing, there was no fraud, nor pretence for fraud, in any part of the transaction. W hat were the facts upon dlr. Parkins's owR showing? iIn tLe year 1818 he had giveln 6,0001. for an ample atnd well-secured annuity of 6941. The annuity was paid up to last December, andl until next December another year's amount could not become due. At this moment there was no legal claim until Mr. Parkins could procure from thse Isle of France a certificate that Milr. Finch was; living. But, in point of fact, so good| was the bargain at this very molnent, that many could be'found ready' to take it off' the hands of Mllr. Parkins, if he refunded wvhat he had | already received. Mr. Parkins had told them, that when the matter was talked over, he objected on principle to deal in annuities; but his repugnance was soon removed, his aversion upon principle was soon extinguished, by the tempting amount of nine and a half per cent. interost. 1ir. HAsRMER. here intimated to the learned counsel that the rate of interest was sixteen anti three-quarters: it was exactly 161. 13s. 4d. per cent. M1r. GuiNtgY resumed. The temptation was, then, still greater; the sixteer anti three-quarters per cent. soon hLelped to get over Skr. Parkins's .scruples to deal in a.nn ities. This annuity was secured On two lives-rlte Honourable Edward Finich, and his brother; anti as he had before said, notonly liad the annuity been said up to last b t never, up to this hour, had l'dr. Parkins either broight an action for the recovery against any of the parties, or fol lowest up his legal claim upon the lirings, which were alone a most ample security. Here was a person who ,led an annuity upon the life of a gentlemen, 32 years of age, of considerable fortune, ait(I a tnember of a noble and nmst honossrahle family, and receiving for the advance of his money 16 and two-thirds per cent., with the lanided security of the glebes ; and yet 'hey were iold, itn defiance ofi all the facts, that he had been defrauded of his money. H- had given 6,0001.: lhe had already been repaid 4,0001.; anti he had this ! exorbitant interest secured to him, and yet he was defraudedl ! He, had never before heard of such an attempt to get uip a case in a court of justice. There was an indictment against dilr. Hicks, the attorncy, who, after all, even supposing tho facts had been other- wisc, had incurred no responsibility, for it was.1dr. Finch whohad made the covenant, and in the same indictment were ptit the namesof IMr. Finch, who was chaplain to the forces in the Isleof France; and IMr. Wlrollaston, who was somewhere abroad on the continent, and ha3l nothing to do with the transaction. Mr. Parkins had never even brought an action agaitst Mlr. Hicks; lie hai( framed an Indict- ment last June, and the defendant instantly gavc notice oftrial, but hlr. Parkins, owing to a defect in the forn, had the indictment re- moved into the Court of King's Bench. This was a fresh indictment brought for the same traasaction, four years after Mir. Parkmns had concluded the bargain, anti received up to the time he had mentionetl thie amount of the annuity. He thcn impressed upon ithe in.ds of the jury, that in this case, in which they were called upon to infer guilt frorm ;lr. Perkins's conversation, or rather his remeinbratice of the conversation of another, after a lapse o1 four years, they must bear in mind that the witness himself, so far froma havingan acctirate recol- lection of his own part oftlhe transaction, had contradicted himself step by step. lVhat he said in evidience one moment, he unsaid the next. They would recollect that lie first said he hiail destroyed the order he gave the hankers to pay thte money on the production of the title-deeds; and wlhen that order, whichi had bect obtained ftom the bankers this morning, was produced to him, he at first denied the hand-writing then he recollected it,-in fact, from beginning to end, he showed the instability of his menmory tor any reference to iacts. He meant to impure nothing todI\r. Parkinsbutthisimbecility of me- mory,wh ich ws, however,palpable enough to caution a jurv upon what frail grounds they must rest, if they adopted implicitly the recollec- tino of a party under such circumstances. As to the charge that the old annuitants lied not been paid, how was it supported ? Two wit. nesses wlio were merely 501. annuitantsappeared not to havebeen paid offi by tMr. Finds, but all the otbers named in the record had, anti were in court to testify it. Why hale they not been called upon by his learned friend ? Ile ridiculed the idea of fouiiditng such a prosecu- tion upotn such facts, and complainied ofthic harshness and unfairness of the whole proceeding. He had no desire to occupy further the attention of the jury by calling witnesses in a case thruugitotit so untenable. Dlr. ALLEY claimed the right of reply, as Alr. Gurney had re- ferred to. and coimmented upon. the or91er whieh Mr. Parkins had given the bankers mi the fi rst instanice for 6,0001. AIr. GuRNFY denied iteat he had -aidi one word of the cointents of that paper-he had merely shown it to dir. Parkins, and repeated the answer whiich that witness had given. Mr. AioeLPi'us contended that it had been consinented upot, and said, that in a late case of a similar kind, M r. &Sarlett hadl been allowed, in the C(ourt of King's Bench, to reply to the Attorney- General, who had read a passage front a book, which lie did not af- terwards use in eridence. The CHSAIRMA.N overruledthie claim of reply, and left iitto the jurv to consider, whether upon so frail a recollection as dlr. Parkins had evinced oftbhe conversation which took place at ithe tinie of this transaction-and he ontly meant to impute to him art i'iperfect me- morv-they couhlt sustain this indictment by their verdict. T'he jury instantly returned a verdict of Not Guilty. .AttbbtRspx S98glov , --T, WOXJDAV,?SBM I.S. '