CHRONTCLE:?’. 
the intention of the bank directors 
to issue a civil process against -him 
fer 100;0001. and upwards, the mo- 
nies paid for the bills, which he had 
converted to his own use. 
The prisoner was dressed in a 
lightish brown coat, his hair full 
powdered. He appeared quite col- 
Jected, but held his head down; ne- 
ver once looking up, except when 
the application was made to keep 
him in custody, when he expressed 
symptoms of great surprise, and 
looked very stedfastly at the court. 
The total defalcation of Astlett, 
by exchequer bills purloined from 
the bank, amounted to 322,000l. 
of which 91,000]. that had been 
pawned, was redeemed for 70,0001. 
80 prosperous are the affairs of the 
bank, that there will be no reduc- 
tion in the dividends of bank stock. 
9th. Between one and two o’clock 
on Saturday, an alarming fire broke 
out in the roof of the’ tower in the 
centre of Westminster abbey. A 
sufficient quantity of water to work 
the engines could not be procured 
for nearly two hours after the flames 
burst forth; in consequence of 
which, the roof of the tower (which 
was framed: of wood) fell in, and 
did considerable damage to the wood- 
work of the choir, both by the vio- 
lence of the falling timbers, and by 
communicating the fire to the stalls, 
pews, &c. When, however, water 
was to be had in abundance, an end 
was speedily put to the progress of 
the devastation. The utmest pos- 
sible exertions were used by fire- 
‘men, soldiers, volunteers, neigh- 
bours, and by the populace at large. 
At half past 5, all danger was at an 
end. The accident was attributed 
to the negligence of the plumbers, 
employed in repairing the roof, who 
had gone to their dinner, and had 
405 
left their melting pot in an improper 
state. No injury was done to the 
monuments. Besides the engines, the 
soldiers, and others, formed lines to 
the Thames, whence they handed 
buckets of water to the abbey, 
The duke of York, and several no- 
blemen, were present, encouraging 
the soldiery, &c. ‘The damage is esti- 
mated at 5000lI. 
11th. In the court of King’s 
Bench an indictment was tried, the 
King v. col. [lepburne, and another. 
This was an indictment against 
col. Hepburne and captain M‘Cum- 
mins, for conspiring to defraud his 
majesty and the public, by the act 
of captain M‘Cummins, who was 
paymaster of the 31st regiment, in ~ 
making up false musters and returns 
of the number of non-commissionéd 
officers and privates of that regi- 
ment, when at Barbadoes, in the 
year 1796; and by colonel Hep- 
burne signing the same, and certi- 
fying them to be true. ‘The regi- 
ment had, at that time, been so re- 
duced by the yellow fever, as to 
consist only of about 120; never- 
theless, the first article of this mus- 
ter was, to subsistence of 42 ser- 
geants and 42 corporals during that 
period. The musters were so evi- 
dently false and fraudulent, that the 
counsel for captain M‘Cummins could 
not attempt any defence for him. 
The question for the jury was, whe- 
ther colonel Hepburne, who certi- 
fied this to be a true muster, did it 
so, fraudulently, knowing it to be a 
false one? The evidence to induce 
the jury to suppose the colonel 
guilty of knowing it to be false 
when he first signed it was, 1st. The 
gross and palpable nature of the 
falshood itself ; which was so glaring 
that a single glance of his eye at 
that account, which he certified to be 
Dd3 true, 
