FORGING A REPRIEVE.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 1937, 10 May 1880, Page 3

FORGING A REPRIEVE.

Mr Caleb Charles Whiteford, a member of the medical profession, wag charged at the Central Criminal Court with misdemeanour for having sent a false and forged reprieve to the gaol of Newgate in reference to a prisoner named Charles Shurety, condemned to be executed for murder.—Mr Poland, Mr Montagu Williams, and Mr Mead prosecuted for the Treasury; Mr Eorrest Fulton appeared for the defendant. This ease was one of a rather remarkable character. A prisoner named Charles Shurety was convicted at the December sessions of this court of tho wilful murder of a child two years old, belonging to a widow named Piper, with whom he cohabited, and the day appointed for his execution was Monday, January sth. Tho defendant, who is a medical man, residing in Albany street, Regent’s Park, appeared to have taken a most extraordinary interest in the fate of the criminal, and ho wrote several letters to Mr Cross, tho Homo Secretary, Mr Liddell, the Under-Secretary, and Sir Stafford Northcote, for the purpose of endeavouring to procure a commutation of tho capital sentence ; but on the 3rd of January he received a final communication from tho Homo Office, to the effect that Mr Cress, after the most careful inquiry, and having communicated with Mr Justics Lindley, tho learned judge who tried the prisoner, felt that the case was one in which, consistently with his duty, ho could not recommend her Majesty to interfere with the sentence that had been passed upon the prisoner. Notwithstanding Jthe recoipt of this communication, tho defendant, on tho 4th of January, the day previous to the one appointed for the execution, made an endeavor to obtain an interview with Mr Cross and Mr Liddell, at their private residences, but failed to do so. On the following morning, a few minutes before eight o’clock, while the sheriffs, the governor, and the chaplain wore in tho cell with the prisoner, and the bell was tolling, the execution being about to take place, the defendant made hia appearance at Newgate, and handed to the warder at tho entrance an apparently official document marked “Immediate,” and addressed to tho governor. The document, upon being opened, purported to be signed by Mr Liddell,the Under Secretary of State, and was in the following terms : “ Rutland-gate, January sth.—To the Governor of Newgate. Prom information just received, and laid before me, in the name of Hor Most Gracious Majesty the Queen, I countermand the order for the execution of Charles Shurety. Will communicate further in tho course of the day.— Signed, Octavius F. Liddell, pro R. A. Cross.” Upon a close examination of the pretended respite, doubts were entertained as to tho genuineness of the signature, and it was also discovered that the envelope was one belonging to the local Government Board, and the officials resolved to carry out the execution. The forgery was of course speedily discovered, and the learned counsel for the prosecution said that the offence was one of such a serious character, and likely to cause such serious consequences, that the authorities felt they had no alternative but to institute the present prosecution as a warning to others not to repeat such a monstrous act. Mr Pulton said he had had no opportunity of conferring with the defendant and his friends, and under his advice, he would plead guilty to the charge. The defendant, on being asked whether he wished to retract his plea of not guilty and plead guilty, replied that ho had no recollection whatever about tho matter. Mr Justice Denman told him that would not do ; he either plead guilty or not guilty; and the defendant upon this pleaded guilty. Mr Pulton then addressed tho Court in mitigation of punishment, and said the prisoner was a most respectable man, in medical practice in Albany street, and the only way in which his conduct could be accounted for was that he had taken such an extraordinary and perfectly unintelligible interest in the case of the prisoner Shurety that hia reason had become impaired, and he was really not responsible for his acts in reference to this particular matter. The father of the prisoner and a medical gentlemen were then examined, and they bora out tho statement of the learned counsel with regard to the condition of mind of the defendant, and to the extraordinary interest ho appeared to have taken in tho fate of the condemned criminal, which, they said, they had no doubt for a time unsettled his reason. Mr Justice Denman, in passing sentence, said the defendant had been guilty of a most serious and mischievous offence, and he had placed the governor of the prison in a most cruel and painful position, and but for his fortitude and determination in resolving to carry out the sentence, notwithstanding the supposed respite, the most serious consequences might have resulted. Ho would give some effect, however, to what had been proved on his behalf, nnd under all circumstances he should order him to be im. prisoned for two months without hard labour, and to pay a fine of £SO.