The Sun.
London, England, 1849-10-24 00:00:00

LAMBETH.

Mrs. Sarah Sanders, a well-dressed middle-aged
woman, the wife of a retired tradesman, worth, was
placed at the bar before Mr. Elliot on a charge of
stealing four sovereigns, the moneys of Mr. William
Pershence.

The complainant, a stout man, who described him-
self as a farmer at Charlton, in Kent, and also as the
proprietor of the Duchess of Kent beer-house in
Lansdowne-road, Camberwell, deposed that the pri-
soner, who lived with him for about fifteen months,
and had charge of his house in Lansdowne-road,
and also the management of the business, absconded
on that day week, taking with her property belonging
to him of the value of over 1001. From that time
until the Friday following he could not learn where
she was; but on that day he discovered that she was
living with a Mrs. Elliott, the sister of his potman, in
Hill-street, Peckham.
Mr. ELLIOTT-What is it you mean to charge the
prisoner with—stealing the 1001. worth of property,
or what ? Prosecutor—My present charge against
her is that of stealing four sovereigns last evening.
.11Ir. ELLIOTT—WeII, go on with your statement.

The prosecutor, in continuation,-said, that on the
evening before he went to the house of Mrs. Elliott,
and seeing the prisoner there, he begged she would
accompany him as far as the house of Mr. Walters,
in the Wandsworth-road, where he had some busi-
ness to transact which he could not well do without
her, and she consented. They went together to the house
of Mr. Walters, but, not finding that gentleman at
home, they were returning to Mrs. Elliott's when the
prisoner said she was very sorry for what she bad
done ; that she had been persuaded to leave him, but
hoped be would take her back to his house. He did
so, and after being together for some time the pri-
soner requested he would lock her into the bedroom
they then were in, and not let any person approach
her, as she required some rest. He did as requested,
and took the key of the bedroom with him ; but soon
after visited her, when she appeared to be sleeping
soundly. Soon after this Mrs. Elliott came to the
house and requested to see the prisoner, but he re-
fused to allow her unless in his presence, and an in-
terview took place. In about half an hour after he
discovered that the prisoner had escaped from his
house, taking with her four sovereigns which were in
a drawer in the bedroom. On making this discovery
he took a cab and hastened to the house of Mrs. El-
liott,. and on seeing the prisoner he charged her with
robbing him. At this moment, to his (witness's)
great surprise, the prisoner's husband made his ap-
pearance, and Mr.!. Elliott gave witness into custody
for making a disturbance. He, however, persisted in
giving charge of the prisoner, and after being allowed
to remain inside for some minutes the prisoner was
taken to the station house, as well as himself, and
both charges were taken.
A solicitor, who attended on behalf of the prisoner,
here rose to cross-examine the complainant, but the
latter refuted to answer any questions, on the ground
that some time ago he commenced an action against
him (complainant) in the name of a person whose
existence he could not discover, and he understood at
that time that the person's name had been removed
from the list cf attorneys.
Mr. ELLIOTT ruled that, as the name of the solici-
tor at present appeared in the Law List, he was bound
to answer his questions.
The complainant then said, that be had in the first
instance seen the prisoner at Charlton, but subse-
quently visited her at a tavern in the Borough as
the friend of her husband, who kept the house at the
time.

Solicitor—Now, sir, on your oath, were you not
received by Mr. and Mrs. Sanders as a mutual friend,
and did you not carry away Mrs. Sanders from under
the roof of her husband ? Mr. Pershence—No, I
did not. She left her home through the alleged
cruelty of her hushand, and sought my protection, and
I afforded it to her.

Solicitor—Did you not leave your trunks in the
house to enable her to get away her wearing ap
parel, and had you not a cab at the end of the street
to take her away ? Witness—l deny it. We went
to live together in Stamford-street, and at my inter-
position she went back to her husband twice, and
subsequently returned to me of her own accord.
While the prisoner lived with me she received 1001.
from Mr. Walter, but this she entirely expended on
herself in the purchase of jewellery and finery of
different descriptions. He (witness) had; been a
bankrupt two years ago, but got his certificate on his
first asking for it, and had been enabled to get into
business by an advance of 500/. from his mother. Is
a married man, and his wife is living in the vicinity
of his residence at Charlton.

Solicitor—On your oath, has not the prisoner
pledged valuable articles belonging to her to support
you and your house ? Witness—Certainly not.
Solicitor—Not a valuable shawl purchased for her
by her husband ? Witness—The shawl you speak of
I gave twenty-five guineas for myself, and therefore
W 3 my property.
Solicitor.—Well, a valuable brooch? Witness—
That brooch was mine also. I gave sixty guineas
for it

Solicitor—Have you ever burned a bonnet belong.
ing to the prisoner? Witness—l did, but I bought
her another.

Solicitor—Did you not burn the bonnet to prevent
the prisoner from leaving you and going to her
friends ? 'Witness—No, I did not do it for that pur-
pose. In conclusion, the witness swore distinctly
that the four sovereigns were safe i❑ the drawer when
he left the prisoner in the bedroom.
The solicitor addressed the magistrate at some
length in reply to the charge, which he said had no
foundation in fact, but had been got up from a vin-
dictive feeling because the unfortunate woman at the
bar had been induced, by the advice of her friends,
to abandon the complainant and return to her husband
and children.
Two witnesses were called on the part of the pri-
soner; one was Mrs. Elliott, who deposed that the
complainant, on taking Mrs. Sanders from her home
on the evening before, had passed his word of honour