People’s Paper: Saturday 28th April 1855

The boy Lucas, who obtained £40 from Messrs. Pinsent and Co. on a banker’s draft, thought forging the signature of Mr. John Elliot, grocer, at Devonport, has been committed for trial. 

[see also: British Banner: Wednesday 25th April 1855]


Transcribed in whole or part from scanned originals: Presented with or without modified text and punctuation. For absolute accuracy refer to the original newspapers. Source: The British Newspaper Archive.


Referenced

GRO0741 Devonport: Richard Steele Pinsent: 1820 – 1864

Sun (London): Monday 23rd April 1855 

The Boy Forger: The boy Lucas, who obtained £40 from Messrs. Pinsent and Co., on a banker’s draft through forging the signature of Mr. John Elliott, grocer, at Devonport, had been committed for trial.


Transcribed in whole or part from scanned originals: Presented with or without modified text and punctuation. For absolute accuracy refer to the original newspapers. Source: The British Newspaper Archive.


Referenced

GRO0741 Devonport: Richard Steele Pinsent: 1820 – 1864

Norfolk News: Saturday 14th April 1855

Accidents and Offences: Forgery by a Boy: At the Devonport Guildhall, on Saturday, William Lucas, an errand boy in the employ of Mr. Boolds, upholsterer, etc. was committed for trial, for having forged the names of “John Elliott,” grocer, of Devonport, to a bill for £40 drawn by Messrs. Stillwell and Co., navy agents, in favour of Daniel W Stephens, Esq., surgeon of Her Majesty’s ship “Basilisk”, one of the Baltic fleet. He cashed the bill at the shop of Messrs. Pinsent and Co. 


Transcribed in whole or part from scanned originals: Presented with or without modified text and punctuation. For absolute accuracy refer to the original newspapers. Source: The British Newspaper Archive.


Referenced

GRO0741 Devonport: Richard Steele Pinsent: 1820 – 1864

Bath Chronicle and Weekly Gazette: Thursday 12th April 1855

An artful young rogue, named Lucas was brought up in custody, before the Devonport Bench of Magistrates, on Wednesday week, charged with having forged the name of respectable tradesman of Fore street to a Bank Post Bill for £40, and thereby obtaining payment of the same. On Monday week, the young hopeful went to Messrs. Pinsent and Co, in Market Street, and passing by the assistants at the counter, proceeded directly to the counting house, and asked for change of a Bank Post Bill for £40, at the same time presenting the paper. Mr. Pinsent, having examined it, asked who sent him, when the promptly replied, Mr. Elliott, Fore Street. Mr. Pinsent then told Lucas that if Mr. Elliott would endorse the bill he would cash it. Thereupon Lucas left, and soon afterwards returned with the bill endorsed “John Elliott,” when Mr. Pinsent at once paid him the amount. Upon the bill being sent to the Devon and Cornwall Bank, it was refused through some informality, and Mr. Pinsent then called on Mr. Elliott, who had not any knowledge of the bill. A search was then made after the prisoner, who, it appeared had recently been employed as errand boy at Mr. Boolds fancy warehouse, Fore Street. Having obtained the cash the first proceeding on the part of Lucas was to purchase a leather purse at Mr. Heydon’s. He then got some half-a dozen young companions, and gave them a treat s at Plymouth Fair, where they visited all the shows. They returned to Devonport in a cab, and treated cabby like a gentleman.” Our young hopeful also had a taste for sporting, as appears from his having visited the shop of Mr. Treliving, where seeing Mr. T. finishing off a fowling piece, Lucas expressed himself highly pleased with the “stock, lock and barrel” and having enquired the “damage” he told Mr. Treliving that if he would use despatch and finish it off by the next day, he would give him “an extra sixpence!” thereupon leaving half a sovereign deposit. The next day the young sportsman called for the gun and purchased a powder flask and having laid in a stock of powder and shot, sallied forth to do execution upon the cocksparrows. While thus occupied, in one of the Ordnance fields, he was espied by an apprentice of Messrs. Pinsent. When Mr. Pinsent proceeded to the spot, and soon discovered our sportsman trying his hand at shooting at a dead dog in the trenches. When told he was wanted, he replied with perfect nonchalance, that he “was engaged and hadn’t time to go”. His gun was however taken from him, and he was carried off to the police station. From the evidence of a lad named White, it appeared that a few minutes after one on Monday, he saw Lucas at the head of Chapel Street, outside the door of Mr. Harris, stationer. Prisoner asked what the Christian name of Mr. Elliott was; not being able to tell he went and looked at the sign, and found it was John which he told the prisoner, who then took pen out of his pocket, went into Mr. Harris’s, and got a dip of ink and wrote something on a piece of paper on the window ledge, telling him, witness, that the paper was worth a great deal of money and that he had picked it up in Fore Street near the Bank. On Tuesday, Messrs. Pinsent had a bag containing £33 4s – brought to them by a boy, to whom Lucas had given it to take care of for him. Prisoner is not 14 years old and has appeared before the Bench on one or two previous occasions. 


Transcribed in whole or part from scanned originals: Presented with or without modified text and punctuation. For absolute accuracy refer to the original newspapers. Source: The British Newspaper Archive.


Referenced

GRO0741 Devonport: Richard Steele Pinsent: 1820 – 1864

Patriot: Thursday 12th April 1855

Forgery by a Boy: At the Devonport Guildhall, on Saturday, William Lucas, an errand-boy in the employ of Mr. Boolds, upholsterer, &c., was committed for trial, for having forged the name of “John Elliott,” grocer, of Devonport, to a bill drawn by Messrs. Stillwell and Co., navy agents, in favour of Daniel W. Stephens, Esq., surgeon, of Her Majesty’s ship Basilisk, one of the Baltic fleet. He cashed the bill at the shop of Messrs. Pinsent and Co. 


Transcribed in whole or part from scanned originals: Presented with or without modified text and punctuation. For absolute accuracy refer to the original newspapers. Source: The British Newspaper Archive.


Referenced 

GRO0741 Devonport: Richard Steele Pinsent: 1820 – 1864

Daily News: Wednesday, April 11th, 1855: issue 2775: News

Forgery By A Boy: At the Devonport Guildhall, on Saturday, a boy named William Lucas, an errand boy in the employ of Mr. Boolds, upholsterer, etc. was committed for trial, under the following circumstances. Having forged the name of “John Elliott”, grocer, of Devonport, to a bill drawn by Messrs, Stillwell and Co., Navy Agents, in favour of Daniel W. Stephens, Esq., surgeon, of her Majesty’s ship Basilisk, one of the Baltic fleet, he cashed the bill at the shop of Messrs. Pinsent and Co. Mr. Pinsent, of the firm stated that on Monday last the prisoner came to the shop and asked Mr. Philip, one of the assistants, if he would cash a bank post bill for Mr. Elliott. He referred him to Mr. Blake, the cashier, and he was further referred to Mr. Pinsent, who, after examining the bill, asked if it was for Mr. Elliott, Fore Street. The boy replied that it was, and Mr. Pinsent said if he would endorse it on the back, he would cash it, as the endorsement was necessary. In a short time, the boy returned with the bill endorsed, and Mr. Pinsent gave him £40. The following day the bill was sent to the Devon and Cornwall Bank with other money, and the manager at once suspected from the style of handwriting and from the character of the endorsement that they were not valid. Mr. Elliott was applied to and at once the suspicion was confirmed. The signature was not that of Mr. Elliott, who knew nothing whatsoever about the bill. The boy was then sought for and was found by Mr. Blake and Mr. Philp, of Mr. Pinsent’s establishment, in the trench shooting. He was afterwards taken to Mr. Pinsent’s and then handed over to the police. Evidence to this effect having been given Henry White, an intelligent lad, between 12 and 13 years of age, who resided in Andrew’s Lane was examined and added the following particulars. He said, on Monday morning last, when I was near the Post-office, Devonport, the prisoner, William Lucas, came to me and showed me a note, which he said he was going to get changed for his master, Mr. Boolds, china warehouse, Fore Street, Devonport, and asked what was Mr. Elliott’s Christian name, I said I did not know; and he then went up to see as the name was painted over the door; having ascertained it to be “John” he went into the shop of Mr. Harris, Book seller, next door to Mr. Elliott, and asked him to give him a dip of ink – taking the same time a pen from his pocket. After getting the ink, he came outside and put a piece of paper on the widow and wrote something (on the note, we presume). He then said he was going down to Mr. Pinsent’s to get it changed for his master. I went to work and about three o’clock I saw him again. He then showed me some £5 notes and some sovereigns and asked me to go with him to Mr. Heydon, book seller, Fore Street, where he purchased a cash bag for 6d. and into which he put the money. He then went up to Mr. Shaw, Fore Street, and bought a knife, for which he gave 1s. He gave the knife to me. He then went to Mr. Treliving, Catherine Street, and asked if he had a little gun for sale. Mr. Treliving showed him one not quite finished for 15s. He asked when it would be ready. Mr. Treliving said by Thursday. Prisoner said he would have it, and paid half sovereign towards it, and promised the other 5s when the gun was finished. In the evening I saw him again after he shut up shop about half past seven, and he took me and two other boys into the omnibus to go to Plymouth fair. He paid for all four 16d. We went up to the fair, and he gave us 1d each to go into Lawrence’s show. After this, he bought some “sweet stuff” and nuts. We then went over to Bedford Street, where prisoners engaged a coach for 2s to take us all to Devonport. When we were in the coach the driver asked if we could “rise a glass of gin” amongst the four of us. Lucas gave him 2d, and the coachman afterwards asked the prisoner if he should take some young women to Devonport in the coach, and he said he was “no way particular”. He drove us to Devonport, and then I went home. On Tuesday dinner time I saw Lucas in Fore Street, and he asked me where I was going. He said don’t go home to dinner, come with me. The prisoner, myself, and another boy named Macksfield, went to Mrs. Windeatt’s eating house, in Catherine Lane, where the prisoner ordered two four-penny plates of meat for each. We ate it all, and after leaving the house Lucas went to Mr. Treliving again and offered him 6d extra if he would get the gun finished by Wednesday. He then went to work, and about four o’clock, I saw him again with a gun which he had from Mr. Treliving, but not the one he had bargained for. He said first he was going to take it up to Stoke, but I went with him to the trench, where he took two powder flasks from his pocket, loaded the gun, and commenced shooting – first at my hat and then at a dead dog. About this time two gentlemen came and asked the prisoner his name. He said “Truscott”. They asked him to go with them for a few minutes to Mr. Pinsent. He said he could not, as he was going to work. He, however, went with them, and I have not seen him until today. He added that on coming from the trench, Lucas passed a bag of money over to him, which he took to his mother, who went with it to Mr. Pinsent. Mr. Pinsent added that the money he had received from the woman amounted to £33, so that he was now £7 minus. The bank post bill was in the hands of the bench. It was dated “London, 14th March, 1855, No. A 2,475, and, at seven days; sight, promised to pay Daniel W. Stephens, Esq., or order, forty pounds sterling, value received of Messrs. Stillwell”. The bill was endorsed on the back “Daniel Stephens, Esq.” and “John Elliott”. Both names were undoubtedly forgeries. The first was written in a tolerably good hand, but was not a complete endorse, the W. being omitted; and unless the owner was a “ninny” he would never have signed his name with “Esq” after it. The second name, “John Elliott” was badly written, apparently by a schoolboy, who in trying to write “his best” had made two or three slips with the pen. The prisoner, on being told that the magistrates would remand him until Saturday on a charge of forgery, stated that he found the note just below the shop of Mr. Cox, optician, Fore Street, about 10 o’clock on Monday morning. He took it to Messrs. Pinsent and Co’s to get it changed without being told to do so by anybody. Mr. Pinsent applied to have the bill delivered into his custody and complained of the unceremonious manner in which it had been obtained possession of by the police. Mr. Glencross remarked that the bill was not worth a penny without the endorsement of the person to whom it was made payable. The prisoner was then remanded until Saturday, and Mr. Bone wrote to London to gain some information respecting the bill from Messrs. Stillwell. It transpired the same day in the previous week, a man dressed like a sailor asked Mr. Sloggett, draper, Tavistock Street, to cash a bank post bill for £40 adding, as an excuse for coming to him, that it was past bank hours, and he wanted to get the money. Mr. Sloggett replied that perhaps, he might get it at Messrs, Pinsent’s. This might have been the same bill, and the knowledge of the circumstances might give some clue to the manner in which the bill came into the boy’s hands, and how he came to apply to Messrs Pinsent and Co. to get it cashed.

[see also London Express: Wednesday April 11th 1855]


Transcribed in whole or part from scanned originals: Presented with or without modified text and punctuation. For absolute accuracy refer to the original newspapers. Source: The British Newspaper Archive.


Referenced 

GRO0741 Devonport: Richard Steele Pinsent: 1820 – 1864

Express (London): Wednesday 11th April 1855 

The Police Courts: … Forgery by a Boy: … At the Devonport Guildhall, on Saturday, a boy named William Lucas, an errand boy in the employ of Mr. Boolds, upholsterer; etc. was committed for trial, under the following circumstances: Having forged the name of “John Elliott,” grocer, of Devonport, to a bill drawn by Messrs. Stilwell and Col, navy agents, in favour of Daniel W. Stephens, Esq., surgeon of her Majesty’s ship Basilisk, one of the Baltic fleet, he cashed the bill at the shop of Messrs. Pinsent and Co. Mr. Pinsent, of the firm, stated that on Monday last the prisoner came to the shop and asked Mr. Philp, one of the assistants, if he could cash a bank post bill for Mr. Elliott. He referred him to Mr. Blake, the cashier, and he was further referred to Mr. Pinsent, who, after examining the bill, asked if it was for Mr. Elliott, Fore Street. The boy replied that it was, and Mr. Pinsent said if he would endorse it on the back, he would cash, as the endorsement was necessary. In a short time, the boy returned with the bill endorsed, and Mr. Pinsent gave him £40. … (continues) …  The boy was then sought for and was found by Mr. Blake and Philp, of Mr. Pinsent’s establishment, in the trench shooting. He was afterwards taken to Mr. Pinsent’s and then handed over to the police. … (continues) …  About this time two gentlemen came and asked the prisoner his name. He said “Truscott.” They asked him to go with them for a few minutes to Mr. Pinsent. He said he could not, as he was going to work. He, however, went with them, and I have not seen him until today. He added that on coming from the trench Lucas passed a bag of money over to him, which he took to his mother, who went with it to Mr. Pinsent. Mr. Pinsent added that the money he had received from the woman amounted to £33, so that he was now £7 minus. The bank post bill was in the hands of the bench. It was dated “London, 14th March 1855 … (continues) … The prisoner, on being told that the magistrates would remand him until Saturday on a charge of forgery, stated that he found the note just below the shop of Mr. Cox, optician, Fore Street, about 10 O’clock on Monday morning. He then took it to Messrs. Pinsent and Co.’s to get it changed without being told to do so by anyone. Mr. Pinsent applied to have the bill delivered late in his custody and complained of the unceremonious manner in which it had been obtained possession of by the police. Mr. Glencross remarked that the bill was not worth a penny without the endorsement of the person to whom it was made payable … (continues) … It transpired that the same day in the previous week a man dressed like a sailor asked Mr. Sloggett, draper, Tavistock Street, to cash a bank post for £40, adding as an excuse for coming to him, that it was past bank hours, and he wanted to get the money. Mr. Sloggett said he had not have sufficient change in the house, and the man asked where he might be able to change it. Mr. Sloggett replied that, perhaps, he might get it at Messrs. Pinsents’. This might have been the same bill, and the knowledge of the circumstance might give some clue to the manner in which the bill came into the boy’s hands, and how he came to apply to Messrs. Pinsent and Co., to get it cashed. 


Transcribed in whole or part from scanned originals: Presented with or without modified text and punctuation. For absolute accuracy refer to the original newspapers. Source: The British Newspaper Archive.


Referenced

GRO0741 Devonport: Richard Steele Pinsent: 1820 – 1864

Trewman’s Exeter Flying Post or Plymouth and Cornish Advertiser: issue 4491: Thursday January 22nd, 1852: Classified Ads 

Valuable Quays, Wharfs, Water-side Premises, Dwelling houses and seats in Chapels for Sale: To be sold by public auction on Thursday, 5th day of Feb. Next, at Moorehead’s Royal Hotel, Devonport at half past six o’clock in the evening, by Mr. Joseph Elms, auctioneer: The following desirable property: [6 lots and 4 pews] Lot 3: – All that Dwelling house and premises, with it appurtenances, situate and being No. 49, in St. Aubyn Street, Devonport, together with the Stable and Dwelling House in Barrack Street, at the rear thereof. The former is now in the possession of Messrs. Pinsent at the yearly rent of £55, and the latter in the possession of Mr. Dunn, at the yearly rent of £20. The above premises were some times since in the occupation of the Devon and Cornwall Banking Company, and are now held for the residue of a term of 99 years, determinable on the death of three lives aged respectively 39, 37 and 32, Conventionary Rent, £6 0s, Heriot £12 12s. For viewing the premises apply to the respective tenants; and for further particulars and information apply to Messrs. Beer and Rundle, Solicitors, Devonport: Dated Devonport 13th January 1852. 


Transcribed in whole or part from scanned originals: Presented with or without modified text and punctuation. For absolute accuracy refer to the original newspapers. Source: The British Newspaper Archive.


Referenced

GRO0741 Devonport: Richard Steele Pinsent: 1820 – 1864

Western Courier, West of England Conservative, Plymouth and Devonport Advertiser: Wednesday 12th February 1851 

Devonport Board of Commissioners: The Commissioners met on Friday at that Workhouse. Mr. R. M. Oliver, the chairman of the Board presiding. The usual routine business having bee disposed of, the minutes of the last meeting were read: Messrs. Pinsent’s Contact. The House Committee referred to the consideration of the Board a question which had arisen between themselves and Messrs. Pinsent and Co., with respect to the quality of certain “ticklenburgh” supplied by that firm to the workhouse, which the Committee had felt bound to reject, as not being equal to the sample: Mr. Rattenbury asked whether a contract had been signed by Mr. Pinsent: Mr. Bridgeland: No; and he says he will not sign it: Mr. Joseph Beer, junr., explained that the contract had been prepared in October, and sent to Mr. Pinsent for his signature. He was from home, and bis clerk requested that it might be left for his perusal. When the clerk called for it again, he found that Mr. Pinsent was in Manchester, in consequence of which the matter had stood over for the time, and, in some unaccountable manner, had been afterwards lost sight of. The result was that the contract had remained in Messrs. Pinsent’s office up to last week, without having ever been signed. Mr. Pinsent, he should state, did not object to sign the contract now, except in so far as it related to this single article of “ticklenburg,” and, with reference to that, he stated that, although the goods he had supplied might not be exactly like the sample, yet, in point of value, they were equal to it, and had cost him quite as much. Mr. Bridgeland: They may have cost him quite as much, for the price of the article has risen, but they are not equal in quality. Mr. Ryder said the statement made by Mr. Beer had altered the complexion of the matter; for the Committee, certainly, had understood, not only that no contract had been signed, but that none had ever been submitted to Mr. Pinsent for his signature. Mr. Beer said the contract was prepared and sent to Mr. Pinsent in October, and it was only last week that he became aware that it had not been signed. Mr. R. B. Oram — presuming that the contract which had been prepared had been based upon a tender put in by Mr. Pinsent — conceived that the Commissioners had only one duty to perform, and that they were bound to call on Mr. Pinsent to execute it forthwith. He would move that Mr. Pinsent be required to execute the contract at once. Mr. J. W. Ryder seconded the motion. Mr. Symons thought they should require Mr. Pinsent either to execute the contract at once, or else to give it up altogether (loud cries of “no, no.”). Mr. Bridegland was opposed to giving him the option of abandoning the contract, seeing that the price of the article had risen. Mr. Symons: But, if he refuses to sign it, we cannot compel him to do so; we must, in that case, give it up; we cannot have Mr. Cole’s business over again. Mr. Heard scarcely understood Mr. Symons. Mr. Pinsent had tendered to supply the Board with certain goods at certain prices, and he was bound, in honour, to fulfil his engagement, and to sign the contract, which was based upon that tender. There might have been an alteration in the value of the goods, which might make him very glad to give up the contract altogether — but thought they ought not to permit it. They were bound to hold him to the prices and the tender he had sent in. The Chairman — having ascertained that Messrs. Pinsent had adopted the contract, by supplying goods under it — was of opinion (and he believed they would themselves feel), that, as men of honour, they were as much bound by it, as though they had actually signed it. Mr. Jos. Beer repeated his statement, that Messrs. Pinsent were prepared to sign the contract, with reference to every other article, except the “ticklenburgh”; and that, they were prepared to submit to the opinion of any three respectable tradesmen. Mr. Laity said, it was due to Mr. Pinsent to state, that he maintained that all the articles sent in were quite equal to the patterns. Mr. J. W. Ryder said, five gentlemen, all connected with the trade, and not one of whom could have had any prejudice against Messrs. Pinsent, had examined the goods, and had come to the unanimous conclusion that they were not equal to the pattern. – After some further conversation, a resolution was unanimously passed to the effect that Messrs. Pinsent should be called upon to execute the contract at once. Mr. Joseph Beer was requested to make this resolution known to them immediately and left the Boardroom for the purpose; on his return, he stated that the contract had not been signed, but that Mr. Pinsent had come over to the Commissioners on the subject. Mr. Pinsent was accordingly called in, and, in answer to the Chairman’s questions, stated that it had tendered to supply the Board with certain goods, and his tender had been accepted; a contract had been afterwards submitted to him for his signature, but he could not tell how long ago; he had not yet perused it, and he could not, therefore, say whether it was in conformity with the tender or no; but he certainly was not prepared to sign it during the continuance of the dispute with reference to the quality of the goods he had sent in. The Chairman said: The Commissioners had desired him to say that that dispute had nothing whatsoever to do with the question which was now before them. They had determined that they would not, at that moment, go at all into any matter of detail; but would confine themselves to asking for a simple yes or no, to the question which he had already put, which was whether Messrs. Pinsent were prepared to sign the contract, which had been drawn up in conformity with their own tender. ~ Mr. Pinsent repeated the answer which he had given before. He had no wish whatever to get out of the contract, but he contended that the goods which he had sent in were the goods for which he had tendered; and he could not consent to be bound to send in goods of a better quality, and of a higher price, than those for which had agreed. The Chairman repeated that the question as to signing the contrast was very clearly distinguishable from that as to the quality of the goods; they were altogether separate from the one from the other, and they ought to be separately considered. Mr. Pinsent said if he had tendered to supply certain goods, he would supply them, though it was to his own loss. In answer to Mr. ORAM: Mr. Pinsent stated that he had been in the habit of supplying “ticklenburgb,” for the use of the Workhouse many years, and that the pattern, upon this occasion, was very much lower quality than the Board had ever before selected. Perhaps that was the cause of the dissatisfaction. After some further conversation, Mr. Pinsent agreed that he would take the tender and compare it with the contract and give a decided answer to the course which would take, within an hour. At the expiration of that time the contract was brought back signed, with a letter from Mr. Pinsent, to the effect that he was willing to adhere strictly to both the letter and the spirit of the tender he had sent in, and to have the question as to quality of the goods determined upon its own merits, without taking any, advantage of the position in which he had stood, in consequence of the contract not having been previously signed. He had, therefore, now signed it, and his signature had been witnessed. The Chairman expressed himself pleased at the turn which the matter had taken. It was precisely what he had expected. The Report of the House Committee was then unanimously confirmed.


Transcribed in whole or part from scanned originals: Presented with or without modified text and punctuation. For absolute accuracy refer to the original newspapers. Source: The British Newspaper Archive.


Referenced

GRO0741 Devonport: Richard Steele Pinsent: 1820 – 1864

Daily News: January 13th, 1851: issue 1447: Birth, Death, Marriage notices

Births: Pinsent, Jan 6th, at St. Aubyn-Street, the wife of R.S. Pinsent, Esq., of a son. 


Transcribed in whole or part from scanned originals: Presented with or without modified text and punctuation. For absolute accuracy refer to the original newspapers. Source: The British Newspaper Archive.


Referenced

GRO0009 Devonport: Adolphus Ross Pinsent: 1851 – 1929
GRO0119 Devonport: Catherine Agnes Ross: 1830 – 1906
GRO0741 Devonport: Richard Steele Pinsent: 1820 – 1864