The University of Texas at Austin

Law in Popular Culture collection

The Complete Newgate Calendar
Volume IV

 
JONATHAN BRITAIN

A plausible Rascal, who was executed at Bristol, 15th of May,
1772, for Forgery

JONATHAN BRITAIN was born near Thirsk, in the
county of York. His parents were poor people, and not
able to give him a liberal education. They sent him to York
to an attorney, whom he was to serve as an errand-boy;
but he had not been long in this station before his master
discovered such uncommon marks of genius and ability in
him that he articled him as a clerk, and took him into his
office. But an impatience of restraint induced him to leave
a master who had behaved to him with so much civility. He
had not, however, been long out of a place when the master
of a public academy employed him as a teacher of mathe-
matics, for which his own studies had qualified him; and
he was promoted to be principal usher in the school. In this
situation he was as restless as in the former, and therefore
quitted it, and entered as a soldier in the regiment of the
10th Dragoons.
   As he was a man of remarkably fine appearance he was

[86]

taken great notice of by his officers, who paid such attention
to him that it very much flattered his vanity; and, inducing
him to rival his superiors in point of expense, his circum-
stances were soon greatly reduced, and he had recourse to the
art of chicane and knavery to support his extravagance.
   In these reduced circumstances he committed a variety of
frauds, most of them of such artful contrivance as to elude
all possibility of detection.
   He had a custom of introducing himself into the company
of persons who had no suspicion of deceit, and then he would
so far insinuate himself into their good opinion as to take
undue advantage of their unsuspecting honesty.
   Reduced to circumstances of great distress, he was
tempted to the commission of forgery. Having forged
several drafts, he passed them at Bristol, and then repaired
to London, in fear of detection. On his arrival in the
metropolis he wrote several letters to the King, intimating
that he had been concerned in setting fire to the dockyard
at Portsmouth. No regard being paid to these letters to his
Majesty, he wrote to the Lord Mayor, declaring that he was
ready to surrender himself, and make a discovery of his ac-
complices, on condition that his pardon should be promised
in an advertisement in The London Gazette.
   At length a pardon to any accomplice was advertised in
the Gazette; on which Britain went to Reading to meet his
wife. But on the very evening of his arrival in that town
he offered some forged drafts in payment; the consequence
of which was that he was apprehended, and lodged in jail.
Britain then wrote letters, which he caused to be inserted
in some of the newspapers, in which he charged Lord
Mansfield and the Earls of Halifax and Faulconbridge,
together with other persons of rank, with having been
bribed by the Court of France to "encourage the setting
fire to the dockyard at Portsmouth."
   Improbable as this story was, many people gave a tem-
porary attention to it, and some even affected to believe it;
but it was too absurd to obtain credit for any considerable
time. At the next assizes for the county of Berks a bill of

[87]

indictment for forgery was preferred against Britain, but
thrown out by the grand jury, on what they considered as
defective evidence; and his discharge would have ensued,
of course, but that three detainers were lodged against him,
which kept him in prison at Reading till he was removed to
Bristol by a writ of habeas corpus.
   Britain was now visited by numbers of people, who, from
motives of curiosity, wished to inquire into the validity of
the tale he had invented respecting the fire; but they could
make no satisfactory discoveries. They saw that the whole
tale was a lie, yet they contributed to his immediate support
in a manner so liberal as to do honour to their humanity.
   On the commencement of the sessions he was arraigned
on several indictments for forgery; but being put to the
bar, he refused to plead, and held in his hand the Gazette
which contained the offer of pardon, insisting that he had
given information against his accomplices who had set fire
to the dockyard at Portsmouth.
   On this he was informed by the recorder that he could
take no notice of the proclamation inserted in the Gazette.
But Britain, instead of paying attention to this declaration,
threw the Gazette upon the table where the clerk sat, and
declared that a scheme was formed to deprive him of life,
contrary to the due course of law.
   Thereupon the recorder mentioned a late Act of Parlia-
ment by which he would be deemed guilty if he refused to
plead to the indictment; but the magistrate did not choose
to proceed on the trial without being in possession of the
Act in question; on which a special messenger was sent to
London to procure the Act, if it could be had in print, or
otherwise to bring an attested copy of it from the Record
Office.
   The messenger returned with the Act of Parliament in
print at the end of two days, and Britain was again brought
to his trial, when he pleaded not guilty to the indictment.
The recorder would have allowed him counsel, but he re-
fused all such kind of assistance, and was determined to plead
for himself. He cross-examined the witnesses in a manner

[88]

that gave sufficient testimony of his abilities ; but the evi-
dence against him was such as not to admit of a doubt of his
guilt, and in consequence he was capitally convicted, and
sentenced to die. He was executed on the 15th of May,
1772.

[89]


Newgate Calendar Vol. IV Table of Contents / The Complete Newgate Calendar