The Sun.
London, England, 1849-12-03 00:00:00

appeared, and strict inquiries were ordered to be made
into the account she gave of a very extraordinary
event, which, if correctly represented, would have the
effect of establishing her claim beyond all doubt
upon the funds of Christ Church parish.
She stated to Mr. Thwaites, and subsequently to
the Lord Mayor' that some month ago, having a
claim by right of birth to support from Christ Church
parish, she was induced by the authorities there to
consent to marry a man who belonged to another
parish, and that she had received the sum of 4/. for
such service ; that she had put up the: banns for the,
man whose wife she had intended to become and her-
self, but that her lover at the eleventh hour refused to
enter the church, and that consequently she had been
obliged to get another man to adopt his name ; that in
her anxiety to oblige her parish she had prevailed
upon a sailor to go to church with her, and marry
her in the name of the person to whom she had been
engaged, and that she handed over, as the price of
that accommodation, the sum of 1/. to the sailor, who
thereupon went about his business without having
had anything more to do with her.
Yesterday Mr. Young, the solicitor to the parish
of Christ Church, attended in order to hear and
answer the case.

The young woman having stated the facts as to her
marriage with the sailor in the name of the man
whose name had been included in the banns with hers,
and her purchase of the husband for V., but softened
down her statement as to the knowledge of the
parochial authorities, said, in answer to Sir John Key,
that scarcely three months had transpired since her
marriage, which occurred in St. Luke's Church,
Whiteehapel.
Sir J. KEY—How long did you live with your
husband ? Defendant (laughing)—l never lived with
him at all. lle was going off to sea, and off he went.
Sir J. Kry—W hat ! the moment he married you ?
Defendant—Yes ; he only waited to get his sove-
reign, and then he cut away.—(Laughter.)
Sir J. KEY—Do you recollect his name ? Defen-
dant—l think it was John Kelly.—(Laughter.)
Sir J. KEY—Do you happen to know the name of
the man to whom you expected to be married ?
Defendant—Yes ; Joseph Murray. We were called
three times, but he would not come and be married,
I suppose, because he did not consider the parish gave
enough.—(Laughter.) 41. was but a small fortune.
Sir J. KEY—I suppose that child is Joseph
Murray's ? Defendant—No, it a'nt. It's Bill Maw-
by's. He was a bookbinder with me, but he's dead.

Mr. Thwaites—She swore that she would leave the
child wi:h me if I did not do as she required.
Sir J. KEY—What reason have you for saying
that tho pari'h authorities induced you to marry to
rid them of the responsibility of supporting you?
Defendant—Why some of them were in the church
when I was married to John Kelly, the sailor. I
asked one of them for money to pay the fees, but he
refused me.

Mr. Young (the solicitor to the parish of Christ
Church) said it was impossible to conceive a more foul
misrepresentstion than was contained in the state•
went of the defendant, which was the more dangerous
as some of the assertions which she openly avowed,
and which told against herself, were undoubtedly true.
It was well known that the authorities of Christ
Church parish were most kind and liberal to the
poor. The case of the defendant was one of the
strongest instances of that fact, and she bad availed
herself of their liberality to libel their motives. She
had represented to the parish that a young man
named Joseph Murray, who was the father of her
child, was willing to marry her; that such an event
would save her character and make her for ever, and
that if she had the means of furnishing an apartment
and redeeming her clothes she and her husuaud would
be able to support themselves without being burden-
some to any parish. The authorities listened favour-
ably to the sugge,tion, and some of the officers were
sent to witness the performance of the ceremony,
which accordingly took place, but not a syllable, of
course, had been mentioned as to the substitution of
one man for another.

Sir J. KEY (to the defendant)—Did you ever in-
troduce Joseph Murray to the parish officer ? De-
fendant—No. I would if he had come, but he
wouldn't. He hadn't the pluck. But he's a pauper
himself.

Sir J. KEY—Did you introduce John Kelly to
them ? Defendant—Of course I did. He met me
at the church door, by appointment, and I intro-
duced him as Joseph Murray, and so we were mar-
ried, and I paid him for it.

Sir J. KEY said that the conduct of the defendant
was certainly such as showed that she had no sense
of decency, not to say a word about morality. It
was equally clear that she had extended the imposi-
tion from the clergyman who performed the cere-
mony to the parish authorities of Christ Church, and
it would be desirable that a further investigation
should take place ; and, in the interval, the woman
and her child should be maintained by the union.
Mr. Young said the parish authorities were deter-
mined to inquire into all the circumstances, and it
was his opinion that it would be in his power to
bring to light the whole of the particulars of a very
vile confederacy to defraud them.