14501940
15001600170018001900
Floruit: 1799–1856
floruit 1799 (A)—1856 (B); Male, married
Life Events
| Event |
Date |
Source
|
| Death |
- on 10 Feb 1856 Wills C:95; cf. Beadle's Book, p. = Feb 1856. |
|
Will
| Will (Ref., Piece, Image) |
Will Dates |
Intestate |
Probate Dates |
Administration Dates |
Comments
|
|
PROB 11/2230, 6: 251-300, 39/35
|
1854-06-13
|
|
1856-03-17
|
|
Wills C:95 - of Lower Wick, Worcester. --- PRO - Gentleman of Saint John Bedwardine Worcester, Worcestershire. ---
|
Executors
| Executor |
Relation |
Comment
|
| John Henry WALSH |
|
|
| Thomas William WALSH [Prob.] |
|
|
| Francis Clarke WALSH [rev.] |
|
|
Family Relationships
Livery Companies
| Company |
Source
|
| Stationers' Company |
McKenzie, D.F. (1978), #8478
|
Occupations (2)
| Occupation |
Comment
|
| Stationer |
Apprentice
|
| Broker |
|
Was Apprentice to Master(s): (1)
Had Apprentice(s): (1)
Addresses (29)
Events (6)
Further Notes
Gents.Mag., 1812, pp.82-83. Saturday, Jan.18 - This day the trial of Mr.Walsh came on at Justice Hall, in the Old Bailey; and great curiosity prevailed, to witness so unusual a circumstance as a Member of the Commons House of Parliament appearing at the Bar of the Old Bailey, on a charge of a capital felony. There were two counts in the indictment, which was grounded on the 42d Geo.II. Chap.25. In the first the prisoner was charged with feloniously stealing the property of Sir Thomas Plomer, his Majesty's Solicitor General, on the 5th December last, to the amount of 11,000l. Being part of the contents of a draft for 22,000l. Which the prosecutor had given to the prisoner, as his broker, to puchase certain Exchequer Bills pending the delay attendant on the procuring a title to an estate intended to be purchased by Sir T.Plomer, to the value of about 22,000l. In the second count, the prisoner was charged with feloniously diverting the possession of this property from Sir Thomas, the rightful owner, and converting it, to the extent laid in the indictment, to his (the prisoner's) own use. The evidence being closed, Mr.Walsh was called upon for his defence, but declined making any observations. - Mr.Scarlett then rose, and took several objections with respect to whether the offence could be construed as a Felony, or as a Fraud only; and stated several cases, tending to shew, that although the prisoner might have been governed by a fraudulent intention, he could not, under the circumstances that had been given in evidence, be deemed to have acted with a felonious intention. - The decision of the Jury must necessarily be wholly governed by their opinion of the intention of the prisoner at the time he received the cheque from the hands of Sir Thomas Plomer; for, unless he had at that time actually meditated what he subsequenty executed, it could not, as Mr.Scarlett humbly conceived, be construed into a felonious intention. - When Sir Thomas Plomer delivered the cheque to the prisoner, was it in the expectation of Sir Thomas, that he should receive from Walsh the Bank-notes for such cheque, or that such cheque was delivered in the performance of a contract for the purchase of Exchequer Bills? - Mr.Scarlett having concluded, Mr.Alley shorty addressed the Bench, and contended for a special verdict from the Jury, on the facts, whether the offence was, in their opinion, a fraud or a felony, reserving the point of law for decision in another place. - The Lord Chief Baron then addressed the Jury, and after recapitulating the facts given in evidence, observed, that it remained with the Jury to decide, whether the prisoner was guilty of the felony. It might be Felony, or it might be Fraud. If the appropriation of the Bank-notes to his own use was in the mind of the prisoner, before the cheque was received, it was manifestly felony. His Lordship remarked particularly on that passage in the letter in which he stated an intention of robbing Mr.O. After noticing the purchase of the American Stock, the Foreign Coin, and the other circumstances in the evidence, he left the case with the Jury. - After consulting a few minutes, the Jury pronounced a verdict of Guilty. - The point of law, as to whether the offence be Felony; or only a Fraud, will be solemnly argued next term before the Judges - on whose decision rests the fate of Mr.Walsh. --- Gents.Mag., 1812, p.286. It appears that the Judges, to whom the case of Mr.Walsh was referred, were of opinion, that the crime with which he was charged did not amount to felony; but , as the Jury had decided on his guilt, and the case did not come before them as an especial verdict, the only way to get rid of the conviction was to represent the matter to the Prince Regent, and solicit for him the Royal pardon, which was accordingly granted. He has been discharged from Newgate, and obtained his certificate of Bankrupt. --- Judd 1, no.4731 - Walsh, Benjamin, M.P. Wootton Bassett 1808-12 (Gent.Mag., 1 [1812], 82-83, 286). --- Parliament 1, vol.2, p.252 - Wiltshire, Wooton Bassett Borough Return 2 Feb 1808 - Benjamin Walsh, esq.., of Lorder (sic) Clapton, in the parish of Hackney, county Middlesex, vice John Cheesment Severn, esq., who accepted the Stewardship of the Chiltern Hundreds, count Bucks. [Return of 14 Mar 1812 - John Attersoll, esq., of Portland-place, county Middlesex, vice Benjamin Walsh, esq., expelled the House]. ---
Sources and References
| Original Sources |
Comments
|
| Stationers' Company - Binding and Freedom Records - McKenzie, D.F. (1978), #8478 |
|
