kely to succeed. She took a most circuitous route,
but, eventually, found herself opposite the Auction Mart, evidently
looking out anxiously for someone; she saw she was watched, and away
she started, and, after a long round, found shelter in Maidenhead
Court, Aldersgate Street, in a little smith's shop--which turned out
to belong to the identical party who resides at No. 1, Park Place,
where the letters were first delivered. Here the pursuit was given
up. No further attempt to trace the receiver was made, the inquiry
before the select committee coming on; but sufficient is shown to
exhibit the system existing to this hour. How, it may be asked, do
they procure the signatures to the deed, one party holding so many
letters of allotment? The system is this: one party signs the deed
as often as disguise will shield him from discovery; then the
practice is resorted to of procuring persons, from 15 years to 60, to
accompany the holder of the banker's receipt to the Railway Office,
to sign the deed in such name as he may direct; for which, when done,
he receives remuneration, varying from one shilling to ten, according
to the premium the scrip may bear in the market." There were several
police cases as to writing and forging these bogus names, and prudent
people were beginning to look shy at railway scrip.

Here is a case which we can hardly understand nowadays. As long as
Newspapers were stamped, it was a misdemeanour to allow anyone to read
them, unless they purchased them, as it was considered a fraud upon the
Revenue. On 23 Aug., in the Court of Requests, Kingsgate Street, a case
came before the Commissioners for adjudication, in which a newsvendor
summoned a person for a small sum, for "reading" the various newspapers.
The plaintiff, in stating the case, said the defendant had been in the
habit of seeing the papers daily, for which a penny a day was charged,
and the present proceedings were taken to recover a balance due on that
account. The Commissioners said that he could not recover, as he had
been guilty of a gross fraud upon the Stamp Office in letting newspapers
out for hire. The plaintiff: But he was in the habit of coming to my
shop, and seeing them. The Commissioner: That don't matter; it is a
fraud upon the Stamp Office, and you render yourself liable to an
information being laid against you for it.