The Express.
London, England, 1853-09-14 00:00:00

DUBLIN POLICE.

EXTILAOILDINAILY CHAROII Or PIN3I7IT.
At the Capel-street police-court on Monday, Mrs. Sarah
Kelly, one of the parties in the famous will ease of " Kelly
v. Thewles," appeared before the presiding magistrates,
Dr. Kelly and Mr. O'Callaghan, to answer the complaint of
Mrs. Elisabeth Deese, otherwise Thewles the other party
in the same cause, for having committed ;wilful and corrupt
perjury in a certain affidavit sworn In the Court of
C hancery.
Mr. J. D. Fitzgerald, Q.C., counsel for the prosecution,
stated the cue. He said he was instructed to apply, on be-
half of Mrs. Elizabeth Deese, otherwise Thewles, that in-
formations should be received against the defendant, Mrs.
Sarah Kelly, for perjury, committed in an affidavit, to
which he would presently call the attention of the bench,
and it was very likely that the charge would afterwards
assume another shape against her—namely, that of a mis-
demeanour, for having procured the destruction of docu-
ments which were in issue in the causes of " Kelly v.
Thewles;" and " Thewles v. Kelly," and which were of
the utmost importance to the ultimate decision of that cause.
It was generally known that a suit had been for some years
pending in the Ecclesiastical Courts between Mrs. Deese and
Mrs. Kelly, the person then charged. The case first came be-
fore the judge of the Prerogative Court, who pronounced •
dens ion, from which there was an appeal to the High Court of
Delegstes,who gave judgmentin favour of Mrs. Deus. Mrs.
Kelly then applied for a Commission of Review to the Lord
Chancellor, and in rapport of that proceeding she made
the affidavit in question. The petition which she presented,
asking for a Commission of Review, stated, among other
matters, " that the judgment of the Court of Delegates was
founded in a great measure on certain letters alleged to
have been written by the petitioner (Mr. Kelly) to one John
Robert Melon." He begged to call the attention of the
bench to • passage in the affidavit made to verify that pill-
not). It was this—" And deponent positively oath that the
letters, of which the exhibits A, B C, D, ifte., purport to
be copies, were written by deponent, but are foms-
ries." So that, having in her petition stated that thejudg-
recut of the delegates against her was mainly founded on
these letters, she smarts in her affidavit that they were
n written by her at all, and wen forgeries. It was in
reference to this statement that the charge of perjury then
preferred ageism Mrs. Kelly was founded, and the charge
of procuring the destruction of documents related to the let-
ten referred to in her affidavit. Having recapitulated the
history of the well-known case of "Kelly v. Thew*"
the learned counsel went on to state that the letters in
question were written by Mrs. Kelly, from lipffid, Sussex,
to Mr. John Robert Malone, her late husband's attorney,
and that some of them bore the poet mark of that place.
Before her marriage with Mr. Edmund Kelly in the year
1838 the defendant formed the design of obtaining posses-
sion of his immense property, and in furtherance of her plans
she fixed upon Mr. Malone as a person who was well suited
to assist in carrying out any arrangements which her hus-
band might think proper to make. It would appear from
these letters that in order to gain over Mr. Malone to her
purposes, she professed to entertain a great affection for
him, and gave him to understand that if he would aid her
in procuring from this old man • conveyance of all his
property, and a ratification of that conveyance by will,
she would marry him as soon as Kelly was dead. In
the year 1837 she did succeed in procuring a con-
veyance to be executed, transferring Kelly's enor-
mous property to her own benefit after his decease, and
through the aid of Malone a will was made in the course
of the same 3 ear. It became a question of great importance
whether the letters to Malone were genuine or not, for if
they were there would be evidence of • conspiracy, the
character of which ha would not venture to describe.
Copies of five letters had been preserved, but more than
that number had been burned. Counsel then read the five
letters in question, which abounded in expressions of at-
tachment towards Mr. Malone, and references to the pre-
paration of a conveyance and a will which were to be
executed by Mr. Edmund Kelly in her own favour. Other
letters were also written by the defendant to Mr. Malone
about the same period, but only one of them was seen by
Mr. Greer, the gentleman who took copies of the five
which he had read to the bench, and the only
passage in this letter which had been preserved
was the following :—" You are to prepare • deed
as well as • will. I told him (Mr. Kelly) that if he would
not consent to do so I would have no confidence in
him." These documents were executed in 1838, and it ap-
peared that the marriage was subsequently celebrated ; and
it was a remarkable fact that, although the defendant had
previously gone by the name of Sarah Kelly, she was de-
utibed in the marriage license as Sarah Birch, spinster.
Counsel having referred to the death of Mr. Kelly in 1845,
and the litigation which arose after his decease between
Mrs. Kelly and Miss Thewles, proceeded to refer to certain
negotiations which it was alleged took place between Mr.
Malone and the defendant, or persona acting in her behalf,
with reference to the destruction of the letters above re-
ferred to. These letters, counsel observed, were of import-
ance, because one of the charges preferred by his client, Mrs.
Nue, being that the documents in question were procured
by fraud, it was of the utmost consequence to show that
Mrs. Kelly was corresponding with Malone, promising to
marry him, and urging him to procure a certain disposition
of Mr. Kelly's property. Mr. Malone demanded 6,0001. for
the letters, and Mr. Campion, Mn. Kelly's solicitor, under-
took to interfere with his client upon the subject of their
purchase. The neg.:ciations for the payment of the money
having he presumed, failed in the i at instance, Mr. Malone
hearing it reported that the letters were forgeries, called

on Mr. Omer, the proctor, with a view to clear his charac-
ter in the transaction. fie (Mr. Malone) placed the
original letters in the hands of that gentleman, who at
once proceeded to make copies of them. He had copied
five, and read the sixth, which he was proceeding to
copy, when Mr. Malone, apparently changing his mind,
said that be could wait no longer, and insisted on getting
the whole of the letters back into his possession. What
the rest of the letters contained he knew not, because they
bad been destroyed in August, 1848, in Mr. Malone's house.
It was ultimately arranged that 6001. was to be given for
the destruction of the letters, and the money was paid in the
following manner:—Mrs. Kelly got a Mr. Despard Taylor,
who took part in the negotiation., to execute a bond for 6001.,
for which she gave him cash, and he gave his bill to
Malone at a short date, and paid it himself when it be
came due. As long as the letters were existing docu-
ments the defendant never contested their genuineness;
but when the case came before the Lord Chancellor,
upon the application for a commission of review, and Set,
jinni Christian, in the course of the argument, on the.
part of Mrs. Deese, repeatedly adverted to the fact that
up to that time Mrs. Kelly had
letters is question were in her handwriting, she (defen-
dant) at length perceiving the importance of sqch a de-
nial, proceeded to make the affidavit upon which the pre-
! mat charge of perjury was grounded : the argument com-
mencing on the 13th May, and the affidavit having been
sworn on the 18th of the same =oath. The learned coun-
sel, in conclusion, stated that he would first prove the ex-
istence of the affidavit, and if it became necessary there
was an attested copy of it in court, and a gentleman who
had examined the original document.
Dr. Kelly having consulted his brother magistrate, said
it was the opinion of the bench that the original affidavit
itself must be produced in court.
Mr. Fitzgerald submitted that the attested copy was
sufficient for the purposes of a preliminary investigation.
Dr. Kelly—The practice has always been otherwise, and
we cannel depart from it in the present instance.
Mr. Fitzgerald—We only ask the bench to take the case
prim/aflame, and to adjourn it pro forma, until we can ob-
tain
the original document.
Mr. Armstrong—The reporters of the press are in court,
and the complainant has therefore the satisfaction of know-
ing that the ex parte statements of her counsel will go
to the public ; but in the name of my client, Mrs.
would ask the public to suspend their judgment until the
case comes on again in a regular manner, when I pledge
myself that a full and complete answer will be given to
every one of the allegations put forward against her.
The parties then left the office.