The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1871-06-24 00:00:00

FINCHAM v. CRICHTON AND WIFE.

The abore cause has been tried In London, and was an
action tor assault and false Imprisonment brought I.y the
plainllif, a monthly nurse, agslott the lion. Alta Crichton.
her husband being jo:fied an defendant, but the grievances
nonviable:l of Leing, as wu alleged, Committed by hire.
CrLitton alone.
- - - - -

The defendant pleaded 'Not Guilty," and also that
the canoes of action were earisfied by the defendant
going to lire with the plaintiff, she rectivimf, from the
defendant reward for meat, drink, and lodgings sup-
plied to her. It seemed that the plaintiff attended
Mr'. Crichton at the hnuse of th , Dowager Lady Lit
-
ford during her confinement. She had a eeri no ill-
nese, and the plaintiff went with her :nto the country.
After that the pinintiff and defendant became intimate,
and in December 1870, Mrs. Crichton called upon
the plaintiff, said she had left her buebraud, and in the
end she took lodgings for her, and when she did not
sleep there she slept t.t the plaintaffla ',Aging'. E. en-
tnally ehe gave op her loudness, and wert to live with
Mrs. Crichton as nurse and companion. About Christ-
mas last all her horn were rent to the plaintiffs lodg
logs, and the contents became mixed up with atom of
the plaintlff ; they wore each other's things, and were
extremely intimate. In February they went to
Dorking together, and lodgings were taken in the
plaintiff's name, Mrs. Crichton not wishing her family
to know where she was. All their things were
mined up in boxes and drawer!. They travelled
about togetht.r. and were on very good P•rms.
However, at parking, one Sunday in April, a
quarrel arose; Me.,. Finch/meg daughter packed
up her boxes, and thay wee taken to the dation.
She returned to Mrs. Crichton ctrtain arlicles of
jewelry which she bad given her, one or two rings and
a watch, and Mid her she had better give them to her
new frieLd, a Mrs. Valliant, and Mrs. Crichton re-
turned her is locket. After • short vieit to Ifrighton the
plaintiff took lodgings in Arandel-ste.et, and went to

Harking and told him Crichton that she heard she
had accused her to her child of stealing her things,
and she offered her the key of her box in order that
anything belonging to Mrs. Crichton might be taken
out. Some angry words pacsed, and Mrs. Crichton
struck the plaintiff a violent blow and ran sway. Mre.
Vaillant, the landlady, "howled like a lunatic," and the
plaintiff pursued Mrs. Crichton' but did not succeed in
cetchiug her. The plaintiff went out amitotic a walk and
then returned to herown lodging.. A policeman entered
her .non. aad Amid he wanted a b.oach which she was wear.
iug, and that he hit been sent by the lady at Barring.
tombonse—Mrs. Crichton. He WM going to tea, it off
when the plaintiff odd she would knock him down if
he couched her. However, she gave it uce and he
asked for a ones belonging to Mein Crichom whieh
was in one of her boxes, and then erod, "Von must
Coln with me ; if yon d6)11.e rii make you." Another
men came in, and they all went to he polices. tati in.
The plain, was locked up all nitht, and until belie
part thicee the vex' day, when the was t •ken to the
Town•hell. where she des charged wit's Aerating the
brooch and creep. Mr,'. Crichton admitted Wet ehe
aud the plaintiff had worn each other's things over and
over again, and the magistrate d iamb+ ted the charge.
Oa craii.examina' ion the plaintiff said that ohs
and Mrs. Criehton hail champagne. She paid sometimee, and rometitnee the defendant. They had brandy.
She raid—Of oouree I drank some—not in the morning.
I lent Mrs. Crichton money, and she owes me money
now. We paid everything in common. I and my
two daughters never went under the name of Forbes%
I went to Broadwoosdhill, Mr. Crichton's place.
I suppose to. I never saw his title deede. I
west for my 'demure. I saw Mrs. Crichton daily.
I never saw Mr. Crichton. I never went to the
hall. I went to fiestlai el, or.! remained two months.
On my return I saw Mrs. C ichbov. She cause to me
in the village. I know the fsmily. Lord "Alford, her
hueband, and all of them blamed her for 'invitee her
huh sml. They have accused me of Influencing her.
Si.- left her hnsband after my visit to the tillage, near
hi r husband's house. She led rived rodely to my
daughter. She made her walk behind her. She gave rue
back a locket with my hair in it. I pot my hand on her
shoulder before she struck me. I did not strike her. I
could not get at hr. I have been with he rseveraltiines
since the gave me into custody. My solicitor has
brought her here. She came to in at Dorking a week
or ten Ways aft, r. She comes for medics' advice..
Naturally. I have tsk-n champagne with her. We
lowa slept together giros this action, and had our
1 meals together. I taw her yesterday at her hotel. I
I may have had champague with her—not brandy. I
ansi etayirg at the same hotel with her.
The witness was crosaexarnined at some length, but
she tweet]ie in argry ant recited, refusing absolutely
to answer lloroe rpoodinn., aisd seeerting that they hat
nothing to do with the cane, and answering othen
after great pressure, so that it it somewhat difficult to
reproduce her evid-tice.
In answer to the learned Judge, she Paid that Mr.
Crichton's family had accused her of inthiencing his
wife, and inducing her to remain away froui him, but
not of encourair'ng her to drink champagne or other
Intoxicating drinks.

A policeman was next called, and Mr. Huddlestou
having announced that he did not propose to call wits
recto., Mr. Chambers summed up, after which Mr.
Ruddleston made a very animated reply, In the course
o! which he accused the plaintiff of having induced
Mrs Crichton to I. ave her husband, and encouraged
her t , remain spirt from her friends, who were ready
and anxious for fir r return, and of baying, f, r the pur-
pose of extorting motley from him, brought this action.
while at the eame time she WA3 on friendly terms with
Mrs. Crichton, I vine at the came hotel, and thinking
champ/see with ter only the previous day.
The learned Jedg , commented in Severe terms on
portions of the evidence, and baying summed up care-
fully, the jury immediately found a verdict for the
plaiuiff—Daniage, one farthing.