The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1870-04-12 00:00:00

FREILINO T. 11.4 .IRS A? • 11.1111R0011.

ELI Et AIM. Om led guilty to stealing •Istir a trousers,
the property of Thomas Carr of Wambrook.- Ile tante into
the prosecutor% preen.. on loth February, and begged for
amistance, which war given him, and he went away. Some
trousers had been hanging n the line in mementoes yard,
and when they mane in the evening to take in the clothe,
thew trousers ecru missing. Stopkiwi fell on the prisoner
at,d he was traced to Ilcmhury, 1,, Ite,intshire, aml
into custody, rith the trousers on hint .4 former °nob--
lion ass proved, and thet.hanman aid he was afraid these
were not the only Acmes he had committed they 11141
rea.ll to believe that other comb:lions had been reconled
against him. The court had been doubting whether thev
should not pant • sentence of penal servitude, and if the
other convictions had bran proved against glum, they proba-
bly must have done so.

-sentenced to months, red Infonued that be would be
under the nil-rein-tire of the police for two rma.

“WINDLINO AT WItIOLTII.

MART Kuzanirrai Illrceu ax indicted bir that 'he being
the bailee .4 • certain chattel ---to wit. a veil, belonzinz to
Samuel Chick and Samuel Chick the younger, did fraudulently
convert the Name to her own it.e, at Weymouth. on the 23rd of
March. 1870. LA abw for .ibtaining by fabe pretences at various
time. within twelve month• laot pant, of Jame. Watkina Spooner
a nantlty .4 bacon, with intent then and there to defraud him
Local Jana* %Yukio. Spoon -r of the cline. at Wevunoith.
Pri•oner pleaded "not guilty" In • firm voice. She .11.
Ilremed as at the examina,lon before the magistrate/I in a black
dresn, .1i er *bidk wee a black *civet jacket. and she wore a Mack
bonnet ith Pam veil. She in stout, and decidedly manic.
looking. (to being told that If she had any objection to the
Jot) die nand •tate it whm they mite to be sworn, the
towed up her veil with • Jerk, and had • prolonged stare
at the jurymen, gi lag a rarcantic grin a• one .or to 14 them
offered to kin. the Tentarnent before the ..th wan administered.
She •es attended by a female cattier. alo. In black, .4 oh In
ahe noted wane quedion at the commencement .4 the trial. and
Wan directed to the ben h where the (.31.1rtu.n aol. she .t... 1
. .

tiprwht at .Ir 4 but the ar,rthy Chairman ordered her •
Kat, Into *lnch she I 'rum.] with • queenly Mr, and fol Jed her
a. in.l In an attitudt ul mimeo).

Mr. Cutle proseciatml: and Mr. Pole defended,
Mr. Spooner dr. gave evidence of prisoner's coming to his
shop and ordering goods, stating that she sax recommmided by
Meters. ilarris. of Caine, and that he believed she was Mrs.
Re. nolda From her conduct and her statements he quite
believed she wai Mrs. Reynolds. and on that belief sent the
go do to Mrs. Reynolds's, 3, Portland.place. She afterwards
visited him two or three times, and ordered goods, which were
all sant to Mrs. Reynolds's. the would not have supplied
prisoner with them goods on credit.
Prisoner thus tarty sent in her attorney, Mr. Welsford, and
summoned him to the front .4 the dock for consultati n.
ense-examined by Mr. Pole: Prisoner never mid she was
Mrs. Reynolds.
Mr. Pole on this objected on • point of law that there was no
false pretence
The ritairman thought the case must go On.
Mr. Pole said there really moo no more evidence of false
pretence, sod .

Mr. (-Laic admitted that he did not think he could
strengthen the ca. of In he representation any further,
Mr. Spooner, in atom er to the Chairman, said that prisoner
had been italtring sith Mm. Iteynolds at Portiand.pLace.
Mr. Cutic tinted that the prosecutor's question wee •• To
whose am I to 'tend these pods!' not "Where .in 1 to send
these gootiar and artrued that what the prisoner maid 'Mum'
Mr. Spooner to part with bia wood.

Ir. Pole argued In oppueltion. The rancor a man wearing •
p.eneupar cap .a. 21 gown, and ordering gi Niels to he 'colt,, an
undergreduat., (rdeired to by Mr. Ca.tle), no doubt iihored a
fel. pretence, ea would al. the presientatlon of a cheque ; but
thin eras an
_entirely different ea..
" • " '

The Cowl haring considered the point,
The Chairman said the sluices stated that the goods were
ordered to be sent Men. Reynolds at Portland-place ; but
•hat sh• stated was not false, bectioie she did indeed lodge
there. Even if she had desired the gissis to be sent to Urn.
Reynolds, he ilid not see It wet d make much difference.
There was no doubt that the inference ilrawn was a mistaken
one hut the order to send to Mrs. Reynolds was not • ham
statement, In order to establish the case, there must be a
false pretence, and that pretence must be nqratived. The
mere statement that the goods were to be sent to Mrs. Reynolds
was not a Woe statement, and he thougfit that the Court were
,rf the opinion that no false pretence had been proved.
A verdict of "Not Utility," was then taken by direction of

_
The next cue, referring to the veils, we theri taken.
111 et Bailey said that on March pi-honer called at the shop
of Ileum Chick, and bought • lappet, and had two veils on
approval, and one mu to be returned neat day. The veil wu
Dot returned, and the called seversJ times, and failed to tibuin
either; but prisoner promised that they ithouhl be returned by
post. She called again and again, and prisoner promises! to
return the velle or the money.
Crow-examined : She would have been alleged to have had
either the goods or the money. It au not the eudom in the
trade for lain. to send down /Toni London into the tho nu,: for
weds on cottunisidon. She did not know which Mrs Blundeil
we. to keep, or which was to be sent hook. If • person had
zoods on trial, the might select to keep the r hole. She
not pety much attention to • statement of prlsoneen about a
cheque for £lOO, but believed .inethlng we. stud about It
Witness delivered the goods to primmer, and did not expect that
more than one thonid be returned.

Mr. Pole timed that there W. 14, no taking to constitute a
larceny; secondly, that prisoner wait to have one of the veils,
and therefore conkt not he bailee of the veil which she waa to
kemi; and thirdly, that Witnes did not know which toil it eas
that prisoner 1110 to keep.
The mote waa directed to prr•ored.
Mrs. Reynolds, wife of Mr. W. J. Reynolds, denoted that
Master Blundell, son of the inisoner, brought her a veil
' (produced) and called for it again on Saturday.
I sir. Sept. Vickery apprehended the poisoner on Saturday
week on a charge of obtaitiing the two lace veils from Miss
Bailey. She said "One of the vette is in Weymouth, and the
other is in London, and I me soon et Yee one." She mid
" The toil will he relented either to-night or to-morrow morn.
ie.:. for he rive We such • paltry sum, only 45, for it,
!hot their sent to London tort It back." At the mote lime
"he anite down the address of a tawnbroker in London. She
snot " I can easily rei one veil, and spoke to her son, and
afterwards let hint have one veil, and then another. When she
gave up the yell that came from London, the said "I claim
that veil as me property."
Sergeant tiarve, corroborated the previon, grid„
Prisoner, he said. declared that she had been offered only la
for the t oil which came from London.

With.. Bannit, tronlimker, 14 London, .Id he advanced
td. on the veil. 0.0 l that he returned it to Ilre. Mundell by
nareel. The prhamer had been In the habit of pawning good,
an him for some time._.

•••••• —••••••--
Thh the ewe fne the prwevution.

Pole .aid this was a crew civil contr.,. the
thing. were deliberately put into prisoner's hands, and the
•haracter of bailee would not apply.to her in
:the raw of tilt' ell
w hich she selected. The prosecution could not tell • hieli,l
the veils she meant to keep, and which she meant to return.
The dealing swain the ordinary conne of businese, ant though
the prisoner was not provided with the money whkli the 'hop-
keeper might reamnably perhaps have supposed her to be pro-
vided with. yet there war no ground for an action In that court.
It nay clear that the property being vented in the primner. no
conrerrion by her would amount to a Larceny.
Mr. Castle said the question was nbetber either irm mold.
p„l...ad it en. dear that une or the other raw w•Itl, and
he was entitled to ask Which.

%Cr. Casdk brieflTreplied.
The Chairman, In miming up, said that in this Moe the
fact" and even the conversations were Important, and I
the question for the Jury would he what Inference they
shook' draw therefrom. The learned Chairman explained 1
the new law 1,, ',teeny In a bailee, and add they
mud he "Libeled that prisoner wits the bailee. and that Ate I
converted the goods to her own use, and that aloe did no
fraudu only. As to the conversion of the lace tell. by the
ari-otier to her osti use, there could he no doubt, for she
p isms) one unite es if she si ere the owner. 'The other veil -he
sent to Mrs heyn-ilds, allows-I her to h.p It 00010 days, and
did nit sold for It till there Wan naive • firma& about it. Did
abe do that tieing the bailee? A laden means a person who
las does po•veased of property not her ,ign, but Which Is
committed to her for he purp we of re,toring It to lto owner,
she become qualithd to keep It. There cold he no
doubt that the property %as handid to primmer as bailivand the
q.rrnti.un Can, WAS isssonsiontenninatid at any moment before
she converted them to her ii..? And did she within the mean-
ing of the astute fraudulently convert to the injury (the real
os net ? On that point the conversation between her and the
dmpwotnati was Imp .rtant. On one ocsasion 'simmer said eh.
had sent the sell to a lady, and she would write, to her and
have it back again, end ,ot another oisasion that the shop.
woman shOUld have either the yells or the money ; but he (the
('hairman) did not gather that she paid she would purchase or
keep either .4 the snilo. Unless the shopaolnan hail given
her further 1•16-endoti or Control over these articles, he slid not
see that thst peculiar mates-ion a. bailee Sae terminated.
The questions for the July to decide were, "Did the prisoner
take the articles as bailee, and not so pure-hatter? Secondly.
" Did Inhe or did she not determine her poweimion as bailee
and, "Did she fraudulently convert them thee one by sending
them to Mrs. Reynold., and the pawnbroker!"
The Jury, after a short deliberation, returned a verdict if
guilty.
Mr. pole. applied for a ease respecting the cuurt's decision
on the paint whether a person has log had goods front a shop
on approval, she Mils a bailor.
The Chairman did not see that there wail anything to grant
a cane on, and declined to Errant one.
Prisoner, being asked .bat the had to ray why sentenced
alsould not he peseed on her, replied that she bought one veil
and meant to keep It, and the other she had either to retuni or
not, and she elected to keep it.
The Chairman aaid she had been convicted on very clear
evidenee, for all the fact, of the case were ondisputed, and
there c.ao sots a li gal dlflie,ultv. lbw counsel had ably defended
her ; hut there ea. no dint that in the eye of the law.., well
a. of all reasonabk persons, ahe was guilty of swindling.—
She wee sentenced Wink calendar month, bard labour.
Pri-otter siably collapsed on hearing the sentence.
The conviction of the prisoner seemed to give the liveliest
i.lea.ure to tanner.. trrileantin of Weymouth. oho filled the
Court, and among the remarks freely pasied, we heard the
wont. "'that six months sill help to ~r,e her out for iny
At Weymouth the nes. was remised with the greatest oath,
f adion, •nd the reports of the ruling of the Chairman at the
Smimis certainly tended to increase the respect always tel
for Mr. floyer.