People v. Gardner — 1 Wheel. Cr. Cas. 23

Majority

p. 23

The People vs. Charles Gardner.

Headnote

On an indictment for sessfon'counterfeit money, with mtention to pass it, fact. of pos SOS SlOH must be prov^.e yteBamo«y; the intenmay^eproYed from cir~ cumstances.

On Counterfeit Notes.'

The prisoner, an active good looking young man, was indicted and brought up for trial, at this term, for having in his possession with intention to utter and. pass off to others, two counterfeit notes ; one $5 on the Mechanic’s Bank of the city of New York; one $10 on the Merchant’s Bank of Providence, Rhode Island ; to which indictment the prisoner, by Messrs. M’Euen and Graham, his counsel, plead not guilty. The facts, as detailed by the appeared to be as follows: about the close of the last term, information was obtained at the police-office, that Ward's Island, in the East River, above the city, had become a retreat for felon, who made it a repository for the, plunder they obtained, in the city and elsewhere.

To ascertain the fact, and stop the progress of the evil, two of the police magistrates, the high constable, and seven or eight officers of the police, went up to the place : they found that the party they were in pursuit of were absent from the island. They found a very large mastiff dog placed at the corner of the house as a sentinel, to warn the inmates of the approach of danger. He threatened to be troublesome, and was secured; after taking proper measures, and placing themselves in proper positions, in and about the house, they waited the return of the party ; presently the saw approaching the shore, three men and one woman ; and as soon as they landed, the woman immediately walked up to the house, and whistled for the dog; but notwithstanding no answer was received, she passed along up' to the house, until she walked inside the door, where she was secured by the officers; the men were .severally arrested as they came into the door, secured in irons, conveyed to the city, and committed to

p. 24

Bridewell. Among the number, was Charles Gardner, the prisoner at the bar.

The complaint however, of the present indictment, was ^or a felony of a different descriptionimmediately on the of Gardner, he was observed to throw his hand gently upon the ceiling of the window, and upon raising it a pocket book was observed laying upon the place he had reached his ¿hand. The pocket book was immediately taken possession of by the officers, and it was found to contain the two counterfeit notes in question. It also contained the terms, abbreviations and initials known to be in use among counterfeiters. On searching the house, two tin boxes were found hidden under the floors, and weather-boarding, corresponding in amount and date, &c. to those found in the pocket book of the prisoner.

These facts were hiade out by the witnesses, who were examined on the part of the people. The case was summed up by Messrs. Graham and M’Euen for the prisoner, in which they contended that although their client had been found “in a den of. thieves,” and had also been found' in possession of counterfeit money, yet no evidence had yet been offered that he ever intended to pass it ; he had offered it tono one ; no one could say that he directly or indirectly attempted to put off his paper upon them: he might have received it from others, for a valuable consideration, not knowing it was bad ; every person is liable to receive false money, and spurious paper ; we often do receive it; very few men in the community but at-some time or other receive it; yet no man thinks of indicting them, &.c.

Maxwell, District Attorney,

replied : after commenting generally upon the case, observed, that this was not a case of a man receiving counterfeit money in the ordinary trails-

p. 25

actions of business, where he is often to be pitied, but not to be punished; but this was a case, where a young man without any visible means of support, chooses to connect himself with a gang of thieves and notorious counterfeiters; pursuing no employment but the commission crimes ; found in the actual possession of counterfeit money, and stolen goods to a large amount, giving no account how he came by them ; offering no proof of character—such was this case. And he would venture to say, 'that in this and every similar one, it would be the duty of the jury to convict, and the court to severely punish.

Recorder recapitulated the principal facts to the jury, and concluded by observing that “ all the witness agreed in every fac tthey had deposed “ to. The circumstances of the prisoner’s laying his pock- l' et-book in the window was positively sworn toby three “ officers, that the pocket-book contained the notes describ- “ ed in the indictment; that the entries made of the purchase of counterfeit money in the pocket-book, was the “languageknown to be used among the venders and buy- “ ers of spurious notes ; that the bills found in the pocket- “ book corresponded to those found) in the accesses of the “ house ; exhibiting an extensive concern, carried on by the “ prisoner and others : that the prisoner had not shown that “he was a man of good character, as he ought to have “ done, if it was in his power; and that the fact of the pos- “ session of large quantities of spurious notes was posi- “ tively sworn to by respectable witnesses ; his intention to “ pass it is to be made out to the satisfaction of the jury. “ From all the circumstance of the case/- it remained for “the jury to say whether he had this money in his pos- “ session with intention to pass it or not; if they had a “ reasonable doubt, that doubt ought to operate in favor

p. 26

« of the prisoner; if on the contrary, they were convinced “ of his guilt, they would pronounce him so.” The jury found him guilty.