Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-03-23 00:00:00

EXTRAORDINARY CHARGE OF SEDUCTION

On Thursday afternoon a young woman complained to
Mr. Arnold, the presidinc, magistrate at the Westminster
police court that her brother-in-law, a captain in the Turkish
Contingent, and afterwards in the Royal Engineers, had
seduced her, and had administered drugs to her to procure
abortion • and also that, upon his conduct being made
known, he had violently beaten and otherwise ill-used her.
Having stated that she had one of the pills which her
brother-in-law had given her left, Mr. Arnold directed the
police to have it analysed, and issued a warrant against the
alleged offender, upon which he was apprehended and
brought to Westminster police court on Friday.
The defendant, Capt. Godwin, apparently about 50 years
of age, having been placed before the magistrate,
Complainant, a girl about 17 years of age, gave her
name Fanny Cusdin. On being sworn, she stated that she
had been living with the defendant and his wife as com-
panion to the latter, at 88, Tachbrook-street, Pimlico, since
last October, Defendant's wife was her sister. On Wed-
nesday, in consequence of what had taken place between
complainant and defendant, the landlady of the house
interfered, and made some communication to defend-
ant's wife ; and defendant having denied the truth of
the assertions complainant had made, she went
up to him _in the drawing-room, where he was

atone, and said, " yon cannot deny that you have been my
seducer ;" upon which he seized her by the hair and dragged
her to Vie top of the stairs, where he kicked her twice in
the back, otherwise ill-used her, and she fell down the whole
flight of stairs.

In reply to inquiries from the magistrate, she said that
she had had a conversation with defendant last Friday even-
ing, in which she expressed her fears that she was in the
family way, and he brought her some pills on Saturday, and
gave them to her to take, unknown to her sister, telling her
that, if they did not do, he would get something stronger.
On Monday night she was ordered to leave the drawing-
room by the defendant. She had seen him touch the ser-
rant on the shoulder, and had told her sister of it.

Mr. Smyth, from the office of Mr. de la Mare, solicitor,
cross-examined the complainant at very considerable length,
in the course of which she said that she had been in service,
and had lived with a "gay" lady in Beaumont-street, but
had left as soon as she possibly could upon discovering her
mistress's character. When defendant turned her out of
the drawing-room into the kitchen on Monday night, he
told her he would have no mischief-making there, and
swore at her and called her a liar. She did not then
say she would have her revenge, and ruin both, de-
fendant and his wife. Told the landlady that defen-
had been improperly intimate with her twice. Defendant
forced her to consent to his wishes about six
weeks ago. Complainant slept by herself on a sofa in the
front drawing-room ; defendant, his wife, and child, in
the next room. They communicated by folding doors.
Defendant left his own bed and came into hers at fivß in
the morning. His wife called out to him, " What are you
doing there ? " when he replied, that he was only looking
at the clock. He forced the complainant against her will
She didn't scream
Mr

Arnold inquired whether he was to understand by
that answer that she did not scream because she did not
thick of it. He was not aware that it required thought and
reflection to induce persons to do so.
Complainant replied, " she did as good sus scream ; but
when her sister went to sleep there was no waking her."
Mr. Smith, pressing the inquiry closely, elicited from her
that she only called out once, and that was at the end
of the time that defendant's wife inquired what he was
doing there. Complainant denied in the most positive
terms that any improper intimacy had taken place
between her and two or three young men whose names
were mentioned, and the portrait of one of whom was pro-
duced. She said her stepmother had not turned her out
of doors for corrupting the mind of a younger sister ; but
admitted that a complaint to that effect had been made.
The second improper intimacy took place when defendant's
wife was out. She did not tell her sister that he had been
intimate with her. She told the landlady on Wednesday.

Mrs. Knott, the landlady of the house,-and Mrs. Patrick,
a lodger, were called. They said they heard screams on
Wednesday, and found the girl lying on the stairs clinging
1,;:) the banisters. They did not see anything done to her.
Ills:, first witness, however, saw defendant retiring into the