The Sun.
London, England, 1849-09-10 00:00:00

LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, SEPTEMBER 10, 1849.

EXTRAORDINARY CASE OF AT-
TEMPTED EXTORTION.
On Saturday an elderly person and his alleged
daughter, both of highly-respectable exterior who
refused to give either name or address, were brought
before Mr. Broughton at Marlborough-street Police-
court, in custody of the police, charged on the police-
sheet with having attempted to extort 5001. from
Messrs. Herries, Farquhar, and Co., bankers, of St.
James's-street, by the following extraordinary

Mr. BROUGHTON—The constable, after receiving a
refusal, said he would take it by force if it was not
given up.
Mr. Woolf contended that was all in the woman's
favour. She had received the bag from her father,
and would not, therefore, part with it to a person in
plain clothes whom she did not know, until she had
received her father's sanction. There was no case
against the female prisoner, and as far as the male
prisoner was concerned he could not see how the evi-
dence implicated him. There was no proof that
either of the prisoners was concerned with the letters
which had been produced. It was natural that both
parties should decline to give their names or addresses
as they were evidently of respectable station. What,
in fact, did the whole case amount to ? The pri-
soners were walking in Kensington-gardens, near a
place where a bag was secreted. The male prisoner
sees the bag, and gets possession of it. He is followed
by an officer, and taken into custody. He could not
conceive what would be the legal view which the
magistrate would take of such a case.
Mr. BROUGHTON said he would tell him at once, in
order to save trouble, that the case could not stand on
the ground it stood on in the police-sheet.
Mr. Woolf only knew of one Act of Parliament
which could apply to this case; but then it must be
shown that a threat was made—that a certain sum
was to be paid to prevent some dreadful accusation
or injury from being inflicted. But, even assuming
I the letters to have come from the prisoners, there
was no threat or menace in them.

means
:
Mr. R. Hook, of the firm of Herries and Co., said
about four days ago a letter was directed to the firm,
which he opened. The letter was anonymous, and it
was to the effect that the writer was anxious to coin-
'
municate some circumstances, provided•a solemn as-
surance were given that no other person than the
firm should be made acquainted with what the writer
was able to disclose. lhe writer could save the firm
from degradation, from an immense loss of capital,
and even from something worse. The writer went
on to say, he had been entrapped by a gang of des-
perate villains, and had been hurled by them from the
pinnacle of fortune to the lowest sink of infamy, and
if one syllable were to be known, or the slightest stir
made, his life would pay the forfeit. The writer,
however, would not yield to their vile and cruel
inclinations. His soul shuddered to see and hear
their cursed designs, and, though he was now
suffering severe privations, he would endure them
rather than be driven from the path of honesty
which he had hitherto followed. If the firm would
pledge their faith as they hoped for mercy in Heaven,
not to make known what he could communicate, and
would also consent to lend their assistance to get the
writer into an honest system of business, he would
trust to their honour and honesty to pay the money
after he made his disclosure. They must be quick
and decide, for he was marked out for destruction,
and would become a victim. A few pounds would
carry him out of the reach of the gang, and would
save the firm from destruction and the loss of
thousands. If they accepted his proposal they were
ntoewpsuptaptehre:_f_ollowing advertisement into the Times
"B. 0. N.—Your terms are accepted. The money,
as required, willnot a moment.—Sept. be
osmenent
ta—ndsept. deposited 4 in the place
named. Lose
After receiving this letter witness read it, and imme-
doiartmelaytioton to
okittdhonwpnoltione.ScoAtlaonodn-sytaarbdle,
caanldledgaavte
tihne-
fbanking- house and advised them to put the adver-
tisement in the Times as suggested. The advertise-
ment was accordingly sent to the Times on Tuesday,
and it appeared the following day in that paper.
ITwo days afterwards witness received a second letter
in the same handwriting as the first. The letter
was to the effect that the writer would have replied
to the notice in the Times before, but he had been
prevented from doing so. If the firm acted honour.
ably with him, and did not deceive him, or allow a spy
to watch him, he would save them, or perish in the
attempt ; but, as he hazarded his life, the writer must
have sufficient means without delay, or all would be
lost. The writer was fully assured that 20,0001.
would not cover the horrid catastrophe contemplated,
which would not only stop the bank for a time, but
for ever, as the books would be destroyed by slow
matches. The most dreadful things were contem-
plated by the horrid gang, from which the writer
fervently prayed to be relieved. The writer had
never, so help him God, done• a deed of which he was
afraid or ashamed. Unless he could privately obtain
means it would be folly to attempt to save them. At
one end of Kensington-gardens, near Knightsbridge-
road, there was a dike, in which were two large
waterpipes. Under one of the waterpipes was suffi-
cient room to conceal a small bag. If they sent a
confidential man with a bag containing 250 sovereigns,
with orders to place it under the pipe unseen by
mortal eye, the writer swore by Almighty God to
avert present evil, and to inform them of all, and to
denounce the villains to them. After he had done
this, he should expect 2501. more, for he could not get
into business with less money. The money was to be
lodged about half-past eleven o'clock, but not before.
If this was done all should be well, but, if he was de-
ceived, all the evil must fall on themselves. This letter
was without date. On receiving this letter witness sent
for the police, and in their presence prepared a marked
canvass bag, and put in it a quantity of farthings,
some shillings, and a marked half-crown in paper.
This bag was given to the office messenger to put
under the pipe. A few hours after this the prisoners
were brought to the banking-house in the custody of
the police. Witness said to the police, " You found
the bag on one of the prisoners ?" The male prisoner
answered, that he went into the dike or ditch for a
certain purpose, and, seeing a piece of red tape
sticking out, he pulled it, and found it belonged to a
bag apparently containing money, and he brought it
away.
Cross-examined by Mr. Woolf—Was almost sure
the prisoner used the word " dike," but would not
swear he did. The bag when examined contained
the coins which witness had put into it with his own
hand. The bag was made to resemble a bag with
250 sovereigns in it.
W. Van, messenger, said he marked a half-crown,
and it was put into the bag. He also marked the
bag. Was directed to take the bag and place it in a
certain spot, between Hyde-park and Kensingtos-
gardens. Witness deposited the bag in a ha-ha, under
a water-pipe, about half-past eleven o'clock, and
covered the bag all over except the top part. Witness
then went away. The half-crown now produced from
the bag taken from the prisoners was the one marked
by witness.
Cross-examined by Mr. Woolf—Witness only saw
a little boy lying on the grass when he put the bag
under the pipe. The lodge was about 80 or 100
yards from the slope in which the pipe was situated.
The place was not a retired spot. There was no
red tape visible, as witness had concealed the bag
too well.
Police-sergeant Smith, A 28, had received instruc-
tions to attend to this case. About half-past nine
o'clock that morning witness went into Kensington-
gardens, and walked about near the lodge. About
ten o'clock witness saw the two prisoners walking
about near the lodge. They came from the bridge,
and the prisoner then crossed over the road, leaving
the woman, and went down into the hollow, stooping
over the pipe. Witness was afraid to go too near,
and therefore could not say whether the prisoner felt
under the pipe. The prisoner went back to the
woman, and they walked about for upwards of an
hour. About half-past eleven they came back again,
and took their seats within view of the water pipe.
As soon as the last witness had deposited the bag and
had gone away, the male prisoner went into the ditch
and came up again almost immediately, and went
towards the female prisoner. 'Witness followed them.
The male prisoner saw witness, and he gave the bag
Vaintdnetshsowhenet
inupusatndtakteoldhinitheimntohecuswtoadsya.
tcoo nhsetrals l
Witness told him the nature of the charge, and
absakge
waterpipe.d? him for
have
Tnthhneet
femalebag.g ot
a Tbpharegi
:prisoner answered " What
priwantedsoneifr
stshha
eei d Witness
aistkneedssthteol dTmahliem
pri-
sonerhee
,sbh:ogyuledhseg;,i,vhaenawddihttenaekrseescnetihvfereodbmathgb.ee beneath th
'one
bag, he
malehl h
he afterwards took to the banking-house. The pri-
soner said he gave the bag to the female prisoner. He
was passing the ha-ha, when be saw a piece of red
tape under the pipe. He went down to get it; but he
was quite ignorant of the contents of the bag. When
taken to the station-house, he declined to give bis
name and address. The woman did the same. The
prisoners were not known to the police.
Cross-examined—The place where witness saw
the prisoner stooping was not a place where persons
went for ease. It was near the public road, where
persons were walking and riding. The male prisoner
did not say, when witness asked him for the bag,
"My daughter has it." When witness followed
them
vipttinhhnr
gieegs
notdahna
tearuartegk:shue,
h‘ts
eieAat rl
hinbi ;dal g
isf
ttoohvreecgebiu. walking away; but witness,
d
krminenucaolesweit
.vapeg
ttT,
hh
beep
eubb rfaaesggum,
Pe
aw'ieat her,nnsdaetds aset
said
oimdd
tahoi
eene
prisoner
.rseeprlgied ean' Y
ti
Shaw,es"
.
in the park about half past A division,that saw
morning.t h prisoners
Saw
the bank messenger go into the dike, and after he had
left, saw the male prisoner go alone to the place, and
in a moment or two afterwards be rejoined the female
and they walked away. Stuith went after the woman,
who had the bag which the other prisoner had given
to her, and witness stopped the male prisoner and told
him to go back with him to the ditch. The prisoner
said he would not go. Witness caught him by the
collar, and told him if he would not walk he would
have him carried. 'Witness went back with the
prisoner and examined the ditch. No one bad been
there for a;certain purpose, the grass being quite dry.
Mr. Woolf, on behalf of the prisoners, said the WORSHIP-STREET.
charge was one of the most extraordinary he had ever A middle-aged
known. The charge on the police-sheet was that the charged with robbery.
his family by
prisoners had endeavoured to extort the sum of 5001,
from Messrs. Herries and Co. under false and fraudu- Mary Forster, a young married woman living in
lent pretences. That was the charge the prisoners woman named Mary Clarke was
Luke-street, Finsbury, having been apprised that her
brother in-law who had already lost one member of
were there to answer; and he would respectfully ask
whether such a charge had been borne out in the least thel same disease, had been attacked by
cholera, and was then lying in a hopeless state at his
degree by the evidence. lodgings in Old Nichol-street, Bethnal-green, she
Mr. BROUGHTON said, whatever might be the
immediately hastened there on the preceding morning
charge at the station, he was not bound by what to render him assistance, as she knew that he was not
appeared on the police sheet. in possession of sufficient means to procure it for
Mr. 'Woolf said he was aware of that, but the himself. Upon entering her brother's room, which
station-house charge, on the evidence produced, at she found had been shunned by all the other inmates
once fell to the ground. In reference more particu- lof the house, she was accosted by the prisoner, and
larly to the female prisoner, he was bound to say upon expressing her surprise at finding her there, as
there did not appear to be the least impitation she was an entire stranger to her and she believed also
to her brother, the prisoner accounted for it by saying
against her. The whole bearing of the testimony
went to show that she was only in the society of that she had accidentally heard of the sick man's
the other prisoner, and that when the bag was re-
shocking condition, and, as he did not appear to have
moved she was not with him, but 20 yards off. There any relatives about him, she pitied his forlorn state,
was no evidence of guilty knowledge of any kind and had determined to remain with him until some
on her part, even assuming that the charge was; made of his near connexions had been informed of his
soner for her disinterested
out against the other prisoner. The bag was given to calamity. The witness gratefully thanked the pri-
her, and when the constable asked her for it the gave kindness, and quitted the
it up to him, room for a few minutes, leaving her there, but on ,

Mr. BROJIGHTON said the offence came under the 7th
and gth of George IV., cap. 29, an Act brought in by
Sir R. Peel, in which it was enacted that every per-
son sending a menacing letter to extort money or
chattels should be deemed guilty of felony, and trans-
ported beyond seas. It was under that Act that the
present case must stand or fall.
Mr. Woolf contended that there was no menace in
the letters. The letters apparently emanated from
some crazy brain ; but there was not a tittle of evi-
dence to show that the prisoners knew anything
about the letters.

Mr. BROUGHTON—Without the letters there are no.
thing but shadows; the offence disappears in a mo.
ment. That I admit.

Mr. Woolf—There is no proof that the prisoners
were at all concerned with or cognizant of the letters.
The letters ought, therefore, to be left entirely out of
sight. But take the letters as they had been read,
and he contended they contained no menace. There
was no threat in them to bring the writer within the
meaning of the Act. Instead of a menace, there was
a promise to defend certain parties from injury by
conspiracy. The letters did not say, "If you do not
give me so much I will do so and so ;" but they merely
stated, "If you will do this, then I will give you
valuable information." The letters at best were but
the production of some crazy brain, and their whole
tenour showed that the writer was labouring under
mental delusion. He felt assured there was nothing
in the evidence of the witnesses to bring the prisoners
within any charge, and nothing in the letters to war-
rant the magistrate detaining the prisoners.
Mr. BROUGHTON said undoubtedly that this was a
serious inquiry and a serious charge against the
prisoners. Mr. Hook had taken a very sensible course
in applying at once to the police, which it would be
well if those who received anonymous letters would
follow. Mr. Hook had also received sensible advice,
which would be found sound in principle and proper to
be generally acted upon. The best course for timid or
nervous persons to take was apparently to fall in with
the views of the writers of anonymous letters, and to
apply at once for the assistance of the police. With
regard to the statement that there was no evidence to
connect the prisoners with the letters, he considered
there was every possible evidence to connect them
with the letters, and he did not think any jury would
hesitate to say that the man who took away the bag
was the writer of the letters or accessory to the
writing of those letters. He was at first disposed to
think that the male prisoner might have gone into the
dike for a certain purpose, and that the prisoner
accidentally saw the strings of the concealed bag ;
that, in fact, he was but a mere passer-by, who had
come accidentally into a situation of undeserved
suspicion. But after hearing the evidence of the
officers, the detailed statement of the way in which
they had watched the place and the movements of the
prisoners for nearly two hours, every shadow of doubt
was removed from his mind. Mr. Broughton then
passed in review all the evidence that had been given,
including the letters, and finished by saying that the
conclusion to which he came was, that as the male
prisoner had taken up the bag, he must have written the
letters. Undoubtedly in the letters there were no direct
menaces, but then judges themselves were not agreed
as to the definition of the term. Here, however,
were such terms as "bloodthirsty villains—conspira-
tors who were to effect some horrid catastrophe,
which was to destroy the bank, the books, and do
more than 20,0001. of damage." This was to be
avoided by paying the writer 5001. It was true the
writer did not say that he was the bloodthirsty villain
who was to destroy them, but he asserted that unless
he had means to go into business placed at his dis
posal, those villains and conspirators would effect their
purposes. The letters were ingeniously worded, but
not so as to avoid threats. It was a serious charge,
and he admitted there was some difficulty in it, but
this made it the more necessary that it should be
tried in a higher court. Mr. Broughton then quoted
a case tried by Baron Bollancl at the Stafford Assizes,
similar in character, but not so strong as to the facts.
This case decided him to send the charge before a
jury. He should, however, give the officer a week to
make inquiries, and to ascertain who the prisoners
were. With respect to the female prisoner, it was
possible she was the daughter of the male prisoner,
and had acted under the control of her father. He
was willing to take bail for her appearance—two
housekeepers in 801. each.
The prisoners were then removed to the lock- up
cells.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSIOIV-HOUSE.
A powerful man named Bowers was charged with
, having, with four other prisoners, broken out of the
county gaol at Nottingham, after having been con-
victed of burglary and sentenced to transportation for
lie.
He was taken into custody in Billinsgate-market.
It appeared that on the 15th of December last the
house of a clergyman at Sutton Bonington was
broken open and entered in the night by three des-
perate villains, who compelled the proprietor, upon
the threat of destruction, to show them were the
plate and money in the house were deposited ~ that
the robbers were subsequently apprehended, and con-
victed, and sentenced to transportation for life; that
they had, on the 21st of December, contrived, in con-
junction with two other prisoners who were confined
with them in the county gaol at Nottingham, to sling
stones in their handkerchiefs, attack the turnkeys,
disable them, and finally escape from prison. One of
the turnkeys had been nearly killed by the desperate
fellows, two of whom had been soon afterwards ap-
prehended and sent off to the penal settlements.
The principal officer for Nottingham identified the
prisoner ; and, having nothing to' say in his defence,
he was delivered into the custody of the officer.
MARYLEBONE.
On Saturday, just as the sitting magistrate, Mr.
Long, was about to leave the bench, a middle-aged
woman named Catherine Fax, was brought up in the
custody of Dafter, an active officer, 346 A, charged
with having stolen a Cashmere shawl, value nearly
1001., the property of Lady Macnaghten, Surrey-
house, Hyde-park.
It appeared from the evidence that on the 17th of
July the prisoner made application at the house for
the situation of cook, and had an interview with Mrs.
Yates, her ladyship's sister. She left with an under-
standing that she was to call again in the course of
the same evening, but she neglected to do so ; and
shortly after her departure the valuable shawl alluded
to was missed from the drawing-room. Information
of the robbery was promptly communicated to the
Superintendent Hughes, who placed the case in the
hands of Dafter, by whom the prisoner was ultimately
captured in Bell-court, Gray's-inn-lane. It was
further shown, that the prisoner had occupied an
apartment at the house of Mrs. Field, East-street,
Manchester-square, and that, in addition to her
leaving without paying any rent, she stole various
articles belonging to her (the landlady).
The prisoner, on being asked what she had to say,
replied that she was quite innocent.
The officer was of opinion that he should be able
in a few days to trace the property, and, in order to
afford time for him to effect that object, the pri-
soner was remanded for re-examination until Thurs-
day next.