The Sun.
London, England, 1862-10-11 00:00:00

THE surN, LONDON; SATURDAY EVENING, OCTOBER 11, 1862.

EXTENSIVE AND SINGULAR DEIALCA-
noNs OF A TAX COLLECTOR.

A few weeks since considerable excitement was
created in Brighton by the fact becoming known
that Mr. W. H. Chittenden, one of the collectors
for the pariah of Brighton, of land, assessed, and
income taxes, had been arrested on a detainer war-
rant in consequence of extensive defalcations dis-
. covered among his accounts. No public proceedings
were taken, the ex-collector being merely lodged in
Lewes gaol as a crown debtor, and the local commis-
sioners of taxes setting to the work of discovering
how extensive the defalcations really were. One
thousand pounds was the amount named in the
detaining warrant, but rumour said this would
cover but a small portion of the real deficit ; and so
it has turned out From a report just issued by the
clerk to the commissioners, it appears that the total
defalcation is £6,565 Bs. 7d., of which the surety
bond covers only £2,500. There is also some per-
sonal property mentioned, the realisation of which
may still further lessen the deficit; but no doubt a
very large sum will remain to be reimbursed to the
Government by an assessment on the whole parish.
The narrative how the defalcations were brought
about contains some rather extraordinary facts. At
a certain period after the close of the tax -year, on
the sth April, the collector has to deliver a sche-
dule of defaulters, which should contain a list of
the names of all persons then in arrear, with the
amounts due from each, and it was on the delivery, at
the end of last July, of this list for the income-tax
to Mr. Maunder (who had been appointed surveyor
fur the district in the preceding month of May,
that this gentleman first discovered irregularity in
the collector's documents, by noticing that the
totals cast up at the ends of the schedule were
much larger in amount than the amounts placed
opposite the names of defaulters in the preceding
part, and upon a closer investigation he found that
the figures of the totals had been altered by adding,
in many instances, the figure I—making, for
example, what in the cast column was £B2, in the
column of totals £lB2, and altering the figures at the
bottom of the cast of the totals by changing 1 to 2,
thus making £l,OOO into £2,000. This was done
in so palpable and blundering a manner as to be
easy of detection. The surveyor called in the as-
sistance of the clerk (Mr. Somers Clarke, solicitor),
and the collector was asked for an explanation. He
stated that the schedule had been carelessly made
out by his clerks, who had not taken the trouble to
copy out the names of the defaulters in it, and
altered the figures to make up the requisite amount
to balance the money paid over by the collector, and
the amount due from defaulters with the total of
the collector's duplicate assessment. This, how-
ever, was not considered a sufficient explanation.
and the surveyor required the collector to pro-
duce to him his receipt books, that he might check
the counterfoils of the receipts with the pay-
ments to the receiving officer, which he did, and
reported to the clerk that there appeared to be
nothing wrong in the money. This was so far sa-
tisfactory that the clerk, who was on the eve of de-
parting for the continent, did not think it necessary
to postpone his journey, the collector having pro-
mised to make out a correct list of defaulters before
his return. A letter from the Board of Inland Re-
venue hastened the investigation, which the preva-
rication of the collector could not delay, and he was
ultimately apprehended as stated, all his documents
and real and personal estate being seized at the same
time. At his office were found no less than 54 receipt
books for the property tax for the year ending April
5, 1862, some of which were wholly used, some par-
tially used, and 13 not used at all. These must
have been delivered from the surveyor's office in
bulk to the collector, and formed a solution to the
misleading of Mr. Maunder when he looked into
the account, as the collector, instead of producing
all his receipt books, produced only such as suited
his purpose. A remarkable circumstance brought
out by the investigation was that the collector had
himself entered all his receipts in the cash book,
showing exactly when and from whom the moneys
were received, and which entries correspond with
the counterfoils of the receipts, and are to a great
extent properly posted up in the collector's dupli-
cate of assessments. This is certainly remarkable
when contrasted with the falsified list of defaulters
and the large amount of the defalcations.
We may here say that the abstractions were of the
most wholesale character. The statement of accoun ts
extends only from Oct. 25, 1861, to Sept. 16, 1862,
when the appointment of the defaulter was revoked;
yet during that time the deficit shown is £6,565 Bs.
7d. Of course peculation had been going on before,
but the previous year's account had been balanced
and closed as between the Crown and the parish.
As an instance, it may be stated that at one time
the sum received for income tax in the collector's
hands was £1,948 17s. 9d., but the payment made
by him, under the sanction of the surveyor, to the
bankers for the receiving officer was only £44 14s.
9d. It appears that the check ordained by the
Board of Inland Revenue had not been thoroughly
carried out by the surveyor. Although the collector
weekly transferred his cash to the banker, after
which he had no more control over it, and the cash
so transferred was supposed to represent the total
amount in hand, yet he was enabled by the absence
of almost, all check to make such large abstractions
as we have stated. The report further adds to the
extraordinary circumstances attending the affair a
statement that the clerk had been totally unable to
discover what has become of the large sum of money
due from the collector. His unfortunate connection
with mining speculations and other transactions
arising out of them does not appear to have absorbed
more than from £l,OOO to £1,500, and there seems
no reason to believe that he is possessed, or any one
for him, of any money or effects not discovered.
The unfortunate hero of the case is a native of
Brighton, and was very much respected in the town.
It is not yet known what ulterior proceedings may
be taken.

It is not surprising to hear that the new collector
has not been able to obtain individual sureties.

HORRIBLE SUICIDE,

An inquest was held yesterday at the Ring's
Arms Tavern, Roadside, Commercial-road, Ratcliff,
on the body of a young woman named Elizabeth
Rose, who committed suicide in her dwelling, No.
3, Caroline•street, Ratcliff.

It appeared that the deceased, who was not quite
21 years of age, was the wife of a labourer, em-
ployed in the establishment of Messrs. Ravenhill
and Salkeld, the engineers, in Ratcliff, and was
the mother of three young children. She had been
suffering from a tertiary fever for a few days only,
and had been attended by Mr. F. G. Aubin, a
surgeon and apothecary, of No. 18, Arbour-
terrace, Stepney, under whose treatment she was
progressing very favourably until Tuesday after-
noon,sf witho s
with
r the t
observed
h when she appeared very composed, and re-
quested her nurse to prepare some tea, and anxi-
ously inquired when the milk woman was likely to
eafterwardst
that
covereda t her hetadh the
n rl
sebe
h bkae. t the
A few mher-
over
deceasedbedclothes, nuand
asd
was hanging on one aide. The nurse spoke to the
deceased, and said "
not cover My dear woman, you must
yourself up in that
manner, and don't lay
your head on one side." No answer was returned,
and the nurse turned down the bedclothes, and to
her great horror and surprise
noticed blood flow-
ing copiously from her mouth, and the handle of a
razor projecting from it. The nurse called aloud
for help, several persons rushed into the room and
West's
brewery them a brewer's man from Mr.
brewery opposite, who endeavoured to remove the
razor from the woman's throat, but failed to do so ;
and th handle was detached from it, and remained
in his Rand. Mr. Aubin was then sent for. On
his arrival the unfortunate woman was quite dead.
He succeeded in extracting the razor with a pair of
forceps. _ _ _

Mr. Aubin, in his evidence, said the razor had
been thrust down the deceased's throat with great
force, and that all the larger vessels were destroyed.
Death must have been almost instantaneous.

The deceased lost a large quantity of blood. She
lived on the best of terms with her husband, and
was very fond of her children. She had been in
a low and melancholy state since her illness com-
menced, and talked somewhat incoherently to her
husband the night before she committed the dread-

ful act which deprived her of life. She managed
to obtain possession of her husband's razor and con-
ceal it in the temporary absence of her nurse.
The Jury returned a verdict, that the deceased
committed suicide while labouring under mental
derangement.

MELANCHOLY SUICIDE OF A COLONIAL
BROKER IN MINCING-LANE.

Yesterday afternoon a long inquiry was gone
into before Mr. Payne, the City coroner, and a jury
of merchants, at the Commercial Coffee-rooms,
Mincing-lane, touching the death of Mr. Arthur
Stonehouse Griffiths, a colonial broker, having
offices at No. 9 in the above lane, who committed
suicide under the following painful circumstances.
The inquest-room was crowded by merchants and
brokers, friends of the deceased. Mr. Smith, solici-
tor, attended to watch the proceedings for the rela-
tives. •

It appeared from the evidence that on Wed-
nesday morning the deceased came to his busi-
ness at his usual time, ten o'clock. He went
into his private office, and told the clerk to
say he wis engaged if any one called to see him.
A Mr. Whistler, who had an appointment with
the deceased about some money matters, called to
see the deceased, and after waiting a short time
the housekeeper of the chambers looked through
the fanlight of the door of the private room
and saw the unfortunate gentleman lying back
on a chair in an apparently dying state. The
room was entered and he was found insensible,
and in a few minutes he expired. There was
a strong odour of essential oil of almonds
about the place, and there was a glass near
the deceased, which contained a few drops of
that poison. On the table of the room were several
letters which the unhappy man had just written.
One addressed to Mr. Whistler was to the following
effect :

" Whistler forgive me. I did not intend to rob
you. I have been swindled. "A. S. G."
Another letter was addressed to Mr. Parrott, who
was a large creditor. It was as follows :

" Thanks for all your kindness. May God repay
you for it, and forgive me all my sins. I have tried
earnestly to pay every one, and were it not for one
or two who persecute me should have succeeded.
May those who have so cruelly robbed me be for-
given ; but my trouble is greater than I can bear.—
Yours, " A. S. GRIFFITHS.
" Comfort my mother if you can."
_ _ _

The other leiters were to his mother and to Mr.
Whitmore, who was formerly in partnership with
him.

Mr. Albert Smith, of Tower•street, a friend of
the deceased, said he had recently noticed him to
be very much depressed, which he attributed to his
pecuniary affairs. He alluded to his old partner
being in debt to him, that he had tried to meet his
engagements, and that he was endeavouring to
liquidate the debts of the old firm. Deceased was
24 years old.
Mr. Nathan Smith James, managing clerk to Mr.
Rae, solicitor, said they had been concerned for Mr.
Parrott in a claim of some £2,000 or £3,000 against
Mr. Griffiths, and a judgment had been obtained,
but there was no pressure put upon him, and he was
to pay off the creditors as the old debts were got in.
Deceased seemed depressed, but he was told that
with a little care he would go safely through his
affairs. He did not know what the deceased meant
by alluding to those who had so cruelly robbed him.
The creditors did not press him, and Mr. Whitmore
could not have done more than he had to arrange
the affairs.

Mr. Lewis, surgeon, having deposed to the fact
the deceased died from the effects of poison, the
Coroner summed up, and after some deliberation
the jury returned a verdict that tha deceased de-
stroyed himself while in a state of temporary
insanity.

ALLEGED PROFLIGACY IN A WORK-

HOUSE.

OFFICIAL INQUIRY.

Yesterday morning, Mr. R. B. Cane, one the in-
spectors of the Poor Law Board, opened an investi-
gation in the board-room of the Bethnal-green
Workhouse, Waterloo-road, Victoria-park, with
respect to certain charges of a grave nature against
Mr. Theobald Merrick, the master of Bethnal-green
Workhouse.

Mr. Lewis, of Ely-place, appeared on behalf of
Mr. Theobald Merrick, the master of the work-
house ; and Mr. Angel, solicitor, represented those
of the parishioners whose memorial had given rise
to the present inquiry.
Mr. Cane said that there were several charges to
be investigated, but he should only at present enter
into that of Mary Ann Scanner.
Sarah Anne Smith, 18, Buck's-buildings, Homer-
ton, said that she was a married woman. Her
maiden name was Scanner. She was formerly a
trousers-maker, and then went into service. She
was in service with two families and then went as
a seamstress to a lady at Clapham, and afterwards
in the Globe-road. After she left that place she
entered the Bethnal-green workhouse, because she
had no clothes, and thought she could get a place
afterwards from it. A Miss Brewer was then living
in the house. Only the staircase separated Miss
Brewer's room from the master's. Witness entered
the house on the 19th of January, 1861. One Sun-
day morning afterwards she was going up to Miss
Brewer's roam with some water, when Mr. Merrick
called out to her, and she went to see what he wanted.
He told her to come into the room. When she did so
she found that he was only partly dressed. He
instantly locked the door, and seized her by the
shoulders, and threw her on the bed. She screamed
but he said he would take care of her. He effected
his purpose. When she got away she met upon the
stairs a Mrs. Brown, an inmate, and told her what
had happened. Witness was crying. Mr. Merrick
solicited her frequently afterwards, but she refused.
Three weeks afterwards she was leaving the work-
house, when the master sent for her to his office,
and told her not to tell any one what had happened,
and he would do well for her. He would give her
always plenty of clothing. She said she had told
Mrs. Brown about the matter. Mrs. Brown was
sent for, and was told by the master that he would
punish her if she told anything about it, and that
it'was not true. Witness also told her it was not
true. He gave witness then a black silk mantle
(produced) and a shilling. She went into service
as a housemaid. When she went out for her holi-
day she used to visit the workhouse and see Mr.
Merrick. He gave her a dress and boots (produced).
She subsequently gave birth to the illegitimate
child in her arms at the Mile-end Workhouse. Mr.
Merrick was the father of the child. Before she
entered the workhouse to be confined she had to
give up her situation in Oxford-street at Mr.
Smart's publichquse and go to reside at a Mrs.
Hickman s. She told Mrs. Hickman what had oc-
curred and sent her to Mr. Merrick. The child was
born on the 7th of January last. Subsequently she
took out .a summons before a magistrate to affiliate
the child upon Mr. Merrick. Before the summons
came due Mr. Angel and Mr. Onion called upon her,
and a proposition was mrde to her by the former,
in consequence of which she received money.
Mr. Lewis objected that Mr. Merrick was not
proved to have known about the proposition or the
money.
_ _

Mr. Angel said that would be shown in evidence.
Witness—Mr Angel gave her £2O in sovereigns.
That was in the Mile-end Workhouse. She went
back to Mrs. Hickman, and remained with her for
two months. She then married her present husband.
Recently a tall gentleman, whom she did not know,
called and asked her whether she would deny at the
inquiry coming on that Mr. Merrick was the father
of the child ? He came again on Saturday week
and took her and her husband to a public-house,
and said that Mr. Merrick sent him to ask her if she
would deny the whole affair, and he would give her
any amount of money. She said she would not.
He said that as she had not taken an oath (before
the magistrates) they could not now punish her for
denying the matter. She still refused.
Cross-examined by Mr. Lewis—She was a per-
fectly innocent girl before she entered the Bethnal-
green house. Never saw the man Gibles in her
house. _ _

Gibles, a sweep, was brought in awl confronted
with the witness,
Witness said she would swear she never saw the
man before. She had seen Mr. Bolderson, the
enginer, she thought, once. He never complained
of her to the master. She was once before the
master, and she told the master that Bolderson had
been improperly intimate with another person. A
girl named Marshall never asked her what she was
doing in the clerk's office, and never threatened to
report her if she kept going about the workhouse as
she was in the habit of doing. Mr. Ayles, the
porter, never taxed witness with being in
the family-way, and she never told him that Gibles
was the father. Mr. Onion called on her after her
confinement, but did not ask her to write a letter.
She had got a person named Newsom to write the
letter produced. Four days after it was written
Mr. Onion called on her. He did not call upon
ber twenty times, but he might have done so twelve
times. He gave her no money. He took her
clothes and kept them to show,
because she gave
them to him. Mr. Merrick forcibly threw her on
the bed.
She screamed out, but she did not scratch
him. Miss Brewer's room was near, and a scream
might have been heard there. She was ten minutes
or a quarter of an hour in the room. She only
screamed once. She did not scream very long. The
screams were directly she was got into the room—
when he locked the door. She knew what he was
going to do, as he had in his office asked her several

times. She did not scream very lend, because he'
told her not to do so and he would take care of her.
He threw her with great
,violence on the bedstead,
and her knee was struck by the post and bruised.
Her hair was all disarranged, and her cap pulled off.
She was crying when she left the room, and when
she met Mrs. Brown on the stairs. Mrs. Brown
said, " You have been in the master's bedroom.
You will remember it, too, for you are not the only
one." On subsequent occasions the master sent for
her to his office under pretext of fetching some-
thing, and solicited her there to a renewal of the
familiarity.
The cross-examination of the witness was con-
tinued to a great length, but apparently without
shaking her evidence in effect.
Mr. Wm. M'Donald, master of the Mile-end
Workhouse, swcrn, said that last witness was deli-
vered of a child at that workhouse on the 7th of
January last, Mr. Merrick called twice at his office
and asked what had taken place between the girl
and Mr. Onion in the office. He said on the second
occasion he wished he could know how the girl
could be got out of the way, and he would not
mind giving £5O. Witness told him he had better
see the girl, but he said he would not. Witness
then said, " Well, could you not manage to get some
one else to see her, and take her away ?" He said
he did not know what to do. He asked if witness
could ascertain for him from the girl what witnesses
she was to bring up at the police-court. 'Witness
asked her the following morning, and she refused
to tell. He wrote to Mr. Merrick that he had the
girl in the office, and she would not say who the
witnesses were. He had no further communication
with Mr. Merrick on the subject.
Cross-examined—Mr. Merrick did not say that
there was a conspiracy between Mr. Onion
and the girl. He did not say that his object
was to find out the names of the witnesses, that
he might institute inquiries as to their character.
Witness did not say," Such a summons is an awk-
ward affair, and you must get the girl out of the
way." He might have said that the best way would
be to get her out of the way. Witness was not in-
terested in destroying Mr. Merrick or otherwise.
Mr. Merrick might have said, " I would have given
' £lO or £5O rather than have such a charge against
me." Witness did not recollect his saying that in
his position such a charge, right or wrong, was an
exposure. It was not Mr. Merrick that said the
charge reflected on all the masters. It was not
witness said so. Mr. Merrick never said he was
anxious to meet the charge, but was at a loss how
to set about it. Witness had seen Mr. Onion about
the case, and went to a public-house with him. Mr.
Orion told him he was a guardian of the poor in
Mr. Merrick's union, and that he was getting up an
inquiry. Witness never received a present of any
one, or anything else from Mr. Onion. He said he
called on witness in consequence of having received
a letter from Sarah Anne Skinner. Mr. Merrick
had called on witness in consequence of a message
from witness that inquiries had been made about
the case at the gate.
The proceedings at this stage were adjourned.