the derangement of the prisoner while he was there.

Dr. John Weir, a physician, and superintendant of the sick of the Victualling-board. He had found evident marks of derangement in the prisoner. He had visited him 3 times, and upon conversing with him he was extremely incoherent: he was very often irascible, but his bodily health was good. He most certainly assumed the character of a person labouring under mental derangement, and it was impossible for him to decide whether it was real or assumed. An artful man, he was convinced, might pretend insanity, so as to baffle all the inquiries of the most skilful surgeons. It was not one of the characteristics of insanity, to be able to abstain from food, except in rare instances. Absence of fever was a characteristic of insanity.

a

Dr. Andrew Baird, Inspector of the Naval Hospitals, attended with Dr. Weir the prisoner while he was in Newgate. There were circumstances which made strong impression on his mind, and the conclusion was, the reverse of insanity. The prisoner was furious in the day-time, and quiet in the night-time. This was a circumstance which induced him to think that he was otherwise than insane. The sleep of furious maniacs was not regulated by day and night.

John Fisher was then called by the Court. He was one of the turnkeys of Newgate, and visited the prisoner sometimes twice a day. On many nights the prisoner had been extremely noisy and sleepless. He very frequently

called out "murder," and rattled his chains in the middle of the night. When the prisoner first entered the gaol, his nights were passed no less sleeplessly. Dr. James Hatch, Medical Superintendant to the Lunatic Naval Asylum.-It was impossi ble for him to speak with cer tainty as to the insanity of the prisoner. The period of the apparent insanity had naturally excited the strongest suspicions in his mind. He considered the derangement not to have taken place until after the committal of the offence. If the apparent insanity had existed previous to the committal of the offence, these suspicions would be materially removed. The same motives which induced him to pretend insanity might have so operated upon his mind as to produce the reality. The prisoner obstinately refused to admit that he was mad. He could not speak with certainty, but he was inclined to think that he might possibly be insane.

Mr. Alley was about to address the Court in reply, but was prevented by the Jury stating that they had made up their minds upon the question.

Mr. Justice Bayley was glad to hear the opinion of the Jury. He had, himself, long ago made up his mind upon the case. If the Jury thought that the prisoner was insane, and therefore was mute by the visitation of God, he would be kept in confinement until the pleasure of his Majesty was known upon this case.

The Jury found a verdict.Insanity. The prisoner was immediately taken from the bar back to his cell.

COURT

The King v. Joseph Merceron, Esq.-This was an indictment against the defendant a magistrate, and for many years treasurer of the poor of the parish of St. Matthew, Bethnal-green, for a misdemeanor, in appropriating to his own purposes the sum of 925l. 1s. 3d.

Mr. Scarlett opened the case by first stating the offices held by the defendant in the parish, in which he had resided for a long succession of years. Besides being treasurer of the poor, he was a commissioner of assessed taxes, and a principal commissioner of sewers, which gave him such an influence, that it might be truly said the inhabitants of St. Matthew, Bethnalgreen, had been in a state of complete subserviency to his despotic dominion. He was a man of large property, and none dared for many years to doubt his infallibility. At last some circumstances created suspicion, and evidence was procured sufficient to induce a grand jury to find two bills of indictment for misdemeanors in the collection of the rates: the charge was for a conspiracy, in receiving from certain parishioners more than was authorized; but when they came on for trial, no witnesses were produced, and an acquittal was the consequence. The law expenses incurred by the defendant amounted to 9147. 11s. 3d., being the sum charged in the bill

of Messrs. Dann and Crosland, his solicitors; and the charge in he had improperly and illegally the present indictment was, that procured this sum to be paid out of the parish monies, together with ten guineas which he had added as his own coach-hire, and other private expenses. The bill was paid by him on the 10th July, 1813, and the facts out of which this proceeding arose occurred between that date and April, 1814. If it appeared singular that transactions of so old a date were now introduced to the notice of the Jury, it was to be attributed to the artful and too successful mode in which the defendant had accomplished his fraud, for the discovery was not made until a disclosure was compelled before a committee of the House of Commons. Mr. Merceron effected his purpose in the following manner :-On the 16th of August, after his payment of the bill of Dann and Crosland, a meeting of the vestry took place upon matters totally unconnected with that subject: for some reason or other it was adjourned until the 23rd of the same month, but still no notice was given to the vestrymen that any thing was to be brought forward respecting the expenses Mr. Merceron had incurred in defending the two indictments. The meeting was attended by Mr. May, the vestry. clerk, and many other parishioners; and after the ordinary business had been disposed of, and all but six or seven of Mr. Merceron's friends were gone, a resolution was proposed by a dissenting minister of the name of Platt, whom Mr. Scarlett charged as

being

being particeps criminis (though not indicted) with the defendant: n this resolution the highest compliments, as might be expected, were paid to Mr. Merceron, and the most vehement abuse heaped upon his prosecutors, and it concluded by declaring that the expenses he had incurred (no sum being named) should be paid out of the parish funds. This was clearly illegal in itself; for the whole vestry had no such power, much less a select few of the private partisans of the defendant. This resolution having been thus smuggled through, it was copied by Mr. May's clerk in the usual book, in the regular course, without exciting particular attention; but it soon got abroad, and of course excited considerable disapprobation; and it was determined by the great majority of the parishioners to resist the payment of the bill when the matter should again be brought forward, as in the regular course it must be, at the vestry for auditing the accounts of the treasurer. It was, however, believed by many, that the object of Mr. Merceron was not pecuniary, and that having carried this resolution, he would not think of enforcing it, as he was known to be a man of fortune, and anxious principally for a party and a temporary triumph. The meeting of the vestry for the audit of the treasurer's accounts took place, pursuant to public notice in the church, on the 6th of April, 1814, and the meeting was more numerous than it had been for many years. The ordinary course of business on an occasion of the kind was this:

The treasurer's private book was produced, wherein were entered, on one side, sums paid by him by order of the vestry, or in pursuance of directions of five or more governors of the parish appointed under the act of parliament by which the parish was regulated: on the other side were entered the sums received by the treasurer from the various collectors: this book was held by one of the vestry, and the amounts being called over, the various vouchers were produced, and the sums were regularly ticked off as they proceeded. On this occasion Mr. Merceron took care that his friend Mr. Platt should have possession of his book, and that reverend gentleman, instead of calling over the amount of Dann and Crosland's bill, omitted it entirely, but took good care to place opposite it the usual tick, to denote that it had been regularly agreed to, and the vouchers produced and verified. This was the mode in which the fraud was accomplished, and the whole sum of 925l. 1s. Sd. (including the 10 guineas added by himself for coach-hire, and entered on the back of the bill of Dann and Crosland) was repaid out of the parish money to the defendant. It was true that the book of the treasurer, containing the entry, had been copied by a clerk of Mr. May, the vestry clerk; but it was merely a matter of form, and Mr. May would swear that, when two or three years afterwards the matter was brought to light in the House of Commons, he was astonished, as well as many of those who had attended the audit vestry on the 6th of April, for

the

the purpose of resisting the claim, and had signed the treasurer's book, convinced that Dann and Crosland's bill had not been included. Many witnesses who were present at the vestry would swear that no such sum as 925l. 1s. 3d., and no such names as Dann and Crosland were ever mentioned at that vestry. Such was the nature of the charge against the defendant-it was a misdemeanor of the most serious kind-it was the misapplication of funds intended for the relief of the poor to the purposes of the rich, and it was fit that it should be established by the clearest evidence: if the testimony in support of it were not unequivocal, and as positive as the nature of the case allowed, the learned counsel desired the jury without hesitation to enter a verdict of acquittal.

Mr. Gude, the first witness, produced two indictments against the defendant; the one was against him and William Cone, for a conspiracy, and dated in Michaelmas term, 1813, for obtaining from the parishioners larger sums than were warranted by the rate: the other was the same date for a similar misdemeanor: it was against the present defendant, and a person of the name of Billington. Mr. Crosland proved the amount of his bill, which was produced to him; the sum was 9147. 11s. 3d. and not 9251. 1s. 3d., ten guineas having been added subsequently to the delivery of the bill.

Mr. James May said that he had been vestry clerk of St. Matthew's, Bethnal-green, for 30 years; the defendant was a magistrate, treasurer, and governor of the poor: he had been treasurer

about 30 years: his duty was to receive money from the collectors, and to pay such sums as the vestry should order, or as the governors under the act, or any five of them, should direct in writing. This witness detailed the usual course of business respecting the parish disbursements. A vestry was held on the 16th August, 1813, and it was adjourned until the 23rd August. The witness was present, and the declared object was, to elect a poor-rate collector, but it had nothing to do with the defendant's accounts. The witness only remained there half an hour, and the resolutions were in Mr. Platt's hand-writing, and were afterwards copied into the vestry-book. The witness had signed the book, but had not read the entries, nor did he know of the resolution respecting the conduct of Mr. Merceron, and the payment of his expenses. The vestry for the audit of accounts was on the 6th April following; but, in the mean time, the resolution respecting Mr. Merceron had been made known, and had become the subject of very general conversation. was not supposed that Mr. Merceron would bring forward his bill. The audit vestry was very fully attended; and at the table Mr. Platt and Mr. Merceron sat side by side, and close to them was Mr. Wrightson. Opposite the witness sat, and checked the amounts announced by Mr. Platt, who held the treasurer's book. Thomas Dann and Crosland's bill was entered in Merceron's book as one of the amounts paid by him, yet it was not called out, nor was any bill produced by Mr.

It

Mergeron

Merceron; had it been produced as it ought to have been, in order to warrant the passing of it, the witness must have observed it. When Mr. Merceron's book was taken to witness's house to be copied, he did not know of the entry of Dann and Crosland's bill, nor did he discover it until the inquiry before the Committee of the House of Commons in the session of 1816-17. The Hon. Mr. Bennet produced there Dann and Crosland's bill, the back of which was then perfect, but it had since been torn, and a different entry of 10 guineas made as the expenses of Mr. Merceron, for coach-hire, &c. The witness was present during the whole of the audit-vestry.

Cross-examined.-Mr. Merceron had resided in the parish for 50 years, and had been a magis trate for about 25 years. He had been treasurer of the parish for 30 years, with the exception of 1814, when he was out, but re-elected. Thanks had many times been voted to him. Great animosities and a high party spirit had prevailed in the parish of St. Matthew, Bethnal-green; and it had increased within the last 3 or 4 years; in that time the Rev. Mr. King had been rector, At the commencement of the prosecutions of 1813, the witness was attorney for Mr. Merceron, but he had given them up, because he was likely to be called as a witness. The witness's trifling bill was paid by the parish. In the vestry-book there appeared a reference to a notice given in church on Sunday, 22nd April, that the subject of the defendant's accounts would

be taken into consideration. Mr. Platt is a dissenting minister, and the owner of property in the parish-to what extent the witness could not state. On the auditday, 6th April, the thanks of the vestry were voted to the defendant. A perfect copy of the defendant's book was kept by the witness, and was open to the inspection of all the parishioners. The practice was, to call over the items, one by one, and to tick them off afterwards: the meeting was very crowded, but the witness swore positively that in his hearing no mention was made of Dann and Crosland's bill. The entry in Merceron's book, passing the accounts, was signed by 34 vestrymen.

Re-examined.-When the entry of Dann and Crosland's bill was first mentioned to the witness, he did not believe it. Mr. Platt had been, as he believed, a doll-maker, or some such trade, before he became a dissenting minister: he married the daughter of Mr. Wilmot, a man of property, at Bethnal-green. The witness had not heard the notice at church on the 22nd of August respecting Merceron's, accounts, but at the vestry of the 16th of August no order was made for such a notice. It was not usual for any one governor or director under the act to give an order for a notice in church; it was usually done by nine governors, or by the parish officers.

Mr. Wrightson, who had signed the treasurer's book under the conviction that the bill of Messrs. Dann and Crosland was not passed, gave positive evidence that the sum and names were never announced