Go to start of previous page ("What had happened to William Wilmshurst?")
This is the version of what had happened that was presented as evidence against William at his pre-trial and trial hearings. (In this version I usually use Wilmshurst’s name as he was found guilty of these actions but he would obviously have disputed that it was him or that the interpretation of his actions were correct).
In January, 1847, a bank in Dorchester received a letter of credit for £300 from a bank in London made out to a William Mason. A letter of credit is like a cheque written by a bank, instead of a customer of a bank, so would be seen as a very safe type of cheque.
On the 11th January, a couple of days later, someone, who might have been William Wilmshurst, arrived at the bank claiming to be Mr Mason and asked for the £300 which the cashier agreed to give to him. Instead of asking for cash the customer asked for most of it to be paid as a banker’s draft (another form of bank cheque) made out to him by the Dorchester bank. So they made out a draft of £267 10s and the remaining £32 10s was given in “notes and cash”.
This conversion of one form of bank “cheque” to another form has the effect of converting a forged document into a genuine document (what we would call money laundering today) but I don’t know if this was his reason for doing it. It also seems to convert it from a cheque with a particular person’s name on it to an open cheque that could be cashed by anyone. He may not have wanted it all in ‘cash’ because that would have been issued as Dorchester bank notes (each bank issuing its own notes at that time) and these may be more difficult to spend or exchange to coins in London.
When the original letter of credit was returned to the issuing bank in London they identified it as a forgery, though done so well that they could hardly detect it.
At the trial it was claimed that Wilmshurst was the person who carried out this fraud.
12th January. The following day a person, presumably the same one, presented the banker’s draft at a bank in London and they converted it into two £100. notes, one £50. note, and £17. 10s. in “money” [presumably meaning coins?]. As an indication that he had received the money he was asked to sign the back of the draft and the man endorsed it with “Received, George T. Lee.”!
He then took the 3 bank notes (which would be Bank of England notes) to the Bank of England and exchanged them to “gold” (coins). The bank notes had the address “George T. Lee, Poole, Dorset” on the back when brought to the Bank of England and the cashier required his London address to make the exchange so the man added “Castle and Falcon” to the back of them. (This was an Inn which was ¾ mile from the Bank of England).
This completed a successful fraud by which he obtained £300, a large amount in those days - this may be worth about £30,000 today!
Later that year William Wilmshurst was in Oxford on 9th September. The exact order of events on this day are not known so this is my guess at the order.
Thursday 9th September - Wilmshurst went to the London and County Bank at Oxford, claiming to be Mr J Brown who was moving to the area and wanted to open an account. He had two cheques to deposit in the account, one for £3724 10s from Sir Edmund Filmor who was MP for West Kent and which he said was in payment of a Mortgage, and another probably for £310 from a Mr Taylor. The cheques were issued from 2 different London banks, one being the London branch of the London and County Bank and the larger amount from the bank of Messrs. Overend, Gurney, and Co.. The bank in Oxford had previously received a letter from Overend, Gurney, and Co. indicating that the bank should expect a large cheque of this amount.
Mr “Brown” had brought a letter from an owner of the London and County Bank indicating that his shares in the bank were enclosed with the letter and recommending him to use the Oxford branch of their bank when he moved to that area. He also had a locked cash box with the initials JB on it which he said contained the shares and various other documents which he asked the bank to keep for him. (When this was opened after his arrest the box was found to just contain brown paper).
He asked for some cash on the basis of the cheques he was paying in, also presenting a forged letter from a senior manager of the bank’s head office and mentioning by name the manager of the Oxford branch who he claimed to know to support his request, but was informed that this couldn’t be done until the cheques had been cleared at the issuing banks. He then asked for £30 as a cash advance on these amounts as he was short of cash at that moment which they did agree to. He was also issued with a cheque book for the new account that was being opened. (In a report of the pre-trial hearings it was stated that there were three cheques of the same high amount currently in Oxford. Perhaps this indicates other attempts to carry out the same fraud but this may be a reporting error as it is unlikely that such large frauds wouldn’t have been mentioned at some other time within the trials).
An hour later Wilmshurst returned to the bank with another cheque. This was for £251 from a Mr J Plaisted, again on a cheque from the London branch of the London and County Bank. He asked for this to be cashed and was again declined so he asked for a letter of credit for £200 with the balance of £51 being paid to his new account. This was also refused but he was eventually given a bank order future dated by 4 days - a cheque that he couldn’t use for 4 days, allowing them to clear the cheques he had brought in. This probably was of no use to him because it would be cancelled when his cheques were found to be forgeries but I presume he accepted it because it would have looked odd to refuse money when he had indicated he had a particular need of the £200.
During the same day he also went to the bank of Messrs. Parsons and Co. in Oxford which was locally known as the Old Bank. He again opened an account using a draft on a London bank, Messrs. Barclay and Co.. He again seems to have asked for a cash advance without success but did get a blank cheque book for the new account.
The Senior Bank Clerk, Mr Bradstreet, at the London and County Bank had felt uneasy about the business with Wilmshurst and in the early afternoon a clerk of Parsons and Co.’s bank, brought in a draft [cheque], possibly for £2,000 but the amount is unclear, drawn by J. M. Brown which raised his suspicions. While this seemed a valid cheque, it obviously raised Bradstreet's suspicions, presumably because Wilmshurst was writing large cheques on his new account before the original cheque paid into the account was confirmed to be valid.
The Senior Clerk then went to the Great Western Railway Station, and enquired if a person of Wilmshurst’s description had gone by the three o’ clock train. He was informed that an express ticket had been ordered by such a person but it was still waiting for him and it was now nearly four. Mr. Bradstreet, the Clerk, then went by the four o’clock train to the Abingdon Road Station, and there, while making enquiry, he saw Wilmshurst drive up to the inn in a hired gig. He confronted him saying he thought he ought to take him into custody because he suspected the drafts as being of no value. Wilmshurst assured him they were genuine cheques, and said, if he was not satisfied, he would return the money he had. Mr. Bradstreet said he was not satisfied, and the prisoner gave him £21 and said he should be coming to Oxford on Saturday, and would give him the remainder. He then consented that Mr. Bradstreet could take his great coat, as a guarantee that he should call with the £9! He also gave up the letter of credit for £200. and the cheque book.
Go to Table of Contents Go to next page ("Unsuccessful results - more from the trial")