sale branch of the linen trade, it was agreed that he should travel to Manchester, Glasgow, and other places, for the purpose of purchasing goods. Alexander kept the circumstance of his partnership a profound secret from his wife's relations; but one of her uncles happened to be in Alexander's counting house, when a bill was brought for acceptance, payable by Alexander and Nicol. Hereupon the gentleman upbraided the former for concealing from him so material a circumstance as that of his being connected in partnership: the other declared, that no partnership subsisted; that Nicol was no more than his servant, and had inserted his own name in the draft either through mistake or villainy. On Nicol's return to London in about two months, Alexander denied his having a right to part of the business; and said he would submit the decision of the case to the court of chancery. Though articles of co-partnership had been regularly executed, Nicol, on account of his embarrassed circumstances, declined entering into an expensive suit of law; and about eight months after this difference, which took place in the summer of 1765, Alexander hav ing quitted his house on Fish street-hill, and opened a warehouse in Tooley-street, Southwark, failed to the amount of about sixty thousand pounds: hereupon it was publicly known, that he was the principal of a great number of retail shops established in different parts of the town, under a variety of names; and it was considered as an extraordinary circumstance that, with a capital so very inadequate to the extensive trade into which he had launched, he should be able to support his credit for so long a period: but the public surprise abated when it was discovered, that he had chiefly depended on the circulation of notes of hand and bills of exchange.

After

After some time he engaged again in business, and a second failure took place; though for a sum greatly inferior to the claims of his former creditors. Having now no expectation of assistance from his wife's relations: he contrived means for establishing himself again in business, which he was better enabled to carry on by means of notes of hand being frequently lent him by a man named Brown. This Brown was in France towards the end of the year 1768; and about that time he became connected with one Aked, of Leeds in Yorkshire, whose notes he passed for the support of his drooping credit, in the manner that he had formerly negotiated those of Brown. Having borrowed eighty pounds on a note of Aked's, endorsed in the name of Brown, for ninety-eight pounds, six shillings, and it not being paid when due, he gave Mr. Fryar, who had advanced the money, another note, as collateral security, assuring him that in a few days the notes should be redeemed. At length Fryar accused Alexander of forgery; and he was committed to Newgate. He was acquitted on indictments found against him for two other offences of a similar nature; but though several witnesses swore the wri ting was not the prisoner's, he was convicted of forging the endorsement on the bill for ninety-eight pounds six shillings. Brown would have proved the most material witness; and, had he been in England, the prisoner would, perhaps, have derived great advantage from his evidence. His behaviour, while in Newgate, was suitable to his unhappy circumstances; but he entertained strong hopes of being considered as an object of the royal mercy. Indeed, from a variety of circumstances great numbers of people believed him to be innocent of the fact; and very powerful interest was made for pre

B 2

serving

serving his life. On the morning appointed for his execution he was respited for a week; and before the expiration of that time (it being represented that messengers were gone to France in search of Brown) he was respited for a week longer. Brown's affidavit was brought from France, expressing that he wrote the endorsement that Alexander had been charged with forging. The affidavit being carried to his Majesty at Richmond, he was pleased to refer the matter to Lord Weymouth; but his lordship's interference could not be obtained, he being then at his country seat. The sheriffs attended at Newgate the next morning, in order to conduct the prisoner to the place of execution. He informed them that his friends were gone to Richmond, to make a second application to the king; and they consented to defer their melancholy office till the issue of the intercession should be known. No further respite being obtained, the prisoner was taken from Newgate about half past twelve o'clock, attended by a dissenting minister, with whom he prayed in an earnest and devout manner. At the place of execution his behaviour was decent and composed; and he persisted in the declaration of his innocence till the last moments of his life. He suffered about half past two in the afternoon of the 9th of August, 1769.

ALLPRESS, JOSEPH. See GUYANT, JOHN. ANDREWS, JOHN, (FORGERY,) was a native of Essex, and for some time grazier, having sent a number of cattle to Smithfield market: after which he sailed to the East-Indies, where he acquired a sufficient sum to enable him to deal in seamen's tickets, on his return to England. This business, sufficiently oppressive to the poor sailors, he carried to the height of extortion, and frequently obtained

of

of them fifty per cent. on advancing money on their tickets. After thus lending money for some time, he ventured on the dangerous practice of forging the wills of seamen, in order to defraud the widows, and met with a narrow escape at Maidstone, on a charge of publishing a forged letter of attorney. He employed some women of his acquaintance in London, to whom he used to give small gratuities to personate the widows of seamen, and by their perjuries he frequently acquired considerable sums of money. Quarrelling at last with a woman named Elizabeth Nicholls, with whom he was thus connected, blows ensued, and the woman determined to be revenged, but disguised her sentiments, till she had an opportunity of injuring him in the most essential manner. He applied to her on a particular occasion to personate the widow of a seaman to whom thirty pounds were due, and to swear that she had a will in her favour. The woman, with a view first to make an advantage of Andrews, and then to betray him, did as she was directed, and signed her name to a forged will in Doctors Commons: in consequence of which Andrews received thirty pounds at the navy office, and became possessed of the seaman's ticket for fourteen pounds. This ticket he offered for sale to a man who kept an alehouse in Oxford-road; but the latter refused to buy it, unless the woman would sign the receipt for it, which she readily did, expecting Andrews would give her a good part of the money thus illegally obtained; but on his refusal to give her more than half a guinea, she determined on immediate revenge. To carry her scheme into effectual execution, she went to another woman with whom Andrews was connected, and both of them having given information against him, he was taken into custody, and lodged in Newgate. As it

was presumed that his offences had been numerous the following scheme was adopted to find f. l evidence of his guilt. The lord mayor commissioned a person, who had formerly known him, to go to Newgate, and hint to him that a warrant would be issued to search his lodgings. Andrews having papers which he thought of great consequence to conceal, desired his supposed friend to pack them in a basket, and leave them with an acquaintance in the Minories. Hereupon the prisoner gave the man his keys, who went, packed up the goods, and carried them as directed. This was done to discover, if possible, whether Andrews had any accomplices: that, if he had, his guilt might be the more clearly ascertained, by procuring stronger evidence against him. When the papers were deposited in the Minories the lord mayor is ued a search warrant; in consequence of which his officers found sixty-four forged wills, and powers of attorney; but no proof arose that he had any accomplices, except the women whom he had employed as his agents. One of these women, however, deposed that she had received above five hundred pounds for him, by swearing to forged wills; but that half-a-guinea for each perjury was all the compensation she received. An. drews, who was in possession of a considerable sum of money when he was committed to Newgate, had no idea that sufficient evidence could be adduced of his guilt; but when he was brought to trial, the testimony of the two women was so positive against him, that the jury did not hesitate to convict him, and sentence of death passed of course. His beha

viour after conviction was remarkably morose, reserved, and untractable. He absolutely rejected the good offices of the ordinary of Newgate, which at first caused a suspicion that he was a Roman Catho