The Sun.
London, England, 1860-09-22 00:00:00

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT, Sept. 2

(Before Mr. Justice Blackburn.)
Frederick Augustus Davis, 35, who had pleaded
guilty at the commencement of the session to three
charges of forgery, was brought up for judgment.
Mr. Giffard, who was instructed to prosecute on
behalf of the Bank of England, informed the court
that the prisoner had a discount account with that
establishment, and presented three bills of discount,

which were placed to his credit, and the whole of

which turned out to be forgeries. The total amount
of the bills in round numbers was about £1,500.
Mr, Best, who appeared for the prisoner, said
that he had filled a very respectable position, and
he believed that if he had been permitted to do so
he would have taken up the whole of the forged
instruments. He did not urge this as any pallia-
tion or excuse for the prisoner, but it was an in-
gredient in the case which he thought ought to be
brought to the notice of his lordship.
Mr. Justice Blackburn, in passing sentence, said
that the prisoner had pleaded " Guilty " to three
charges of forgery, and the depositions left no
doubt that he had committed that offence. It was
an offence of a very serious character, and one that
it was impossible to pass over with a light sentence.
The learned counsel had urged on his behalf that
he intended to fake up the bills, and, probably, if
he had had an opportunity, ho would have done so,
but that was no excuse whatever for him. In every
case where a clerk embezzled or misappropriated
moneys of his employer he generally intended
in the first instance to make it good, and pro-
bably in many instances he did so, but the
result was that he continued in a course of
crime, and the extent of his defalcations be-
came very great. In the present case the for-
mer respectable position of the prisoner was an
aggravation of his offence, for he must have known
perfectly well the nature of the act he was com-
mitting, and its dangerous character in a commer-
cial community. The amount of the forgeries was
very large, and the very lightest sentence he
could possibly pronounce was one of six years'
penal servitude.
Alien Feric Johnson, 28, upholsterer, and Sarah
Elliott, 29, were jointly charged with having
bya
re forcents a
fe-
loniously away from the cus-
tody named Clara Tolson
o of
her and
p
Smith, she being under the age of ten years, with-
out their consent.

There were a variety of other counts varying
the form of the charge, and by one of them the in-
dictment alleged that the object of taking away the
child was to steal the clothes she had on at the
time.

Mr. M'Donnell appeared for the prosecution.
The woman Elliott had been admitted to bail,
and she did not surrender, and Mr. Jonas, the
Governor of Newgate, handed to the learned judge
a letter that had been received from her, ad-
dressed to the man Johnson, which was dated
from Southampton, and the writer stated in it that
before the receipt of the letter the writer would be
no more, and would be at the bottom of the
Southampton Water. It was not considered pru-
dent to show this letter to the prisoner Johnson,
and he was, of course, not aware that such a com-
munication had been received.

Mr. Justice Byles, having inquired whether any
further information had been received in reference
to the statement contained in the letter,-was in-
formed that nothing more was known than what
appeared in the letter.
Mr. Justice Byles said that all that could be done
was to estreat the recognisances of the woman, and
proceed with the case against the prisoner Johnson.
The evidence vent to show that the father and
mother of the child in question resided in Knights-
bridge, and that the father was in the habit of sing-
ing at different concert rooms in the metropolis
with the child, who, it appeared, is only five years
and four months old, but who is said to possess con-
siderable musical talent. The prisoner and the
woman Elliott lived in the same neighbourhood,
passing as man and wife, by the names of Mr. and
Mrs. Elliott, and it seemed that they were on inti-
mate terms with the father and mother of the child.
On the 30th of July the woman Elliott went to
Mrs. Smith and proposed to take the child out and
buy her a sash, and the mother consented that the
child should accompany her, but upon the under-
standing that she was to bring her back very
shortly. It appeared that, immediately after the
woman had obtained possession of the child, she
was joined by the prisoner, and they all three
stayed in London that night, and on the following
morning they proceeded to Southampton, and
thence to Portsmouth, where both prisoners were
taken into custody on the 15th of August, the child
being still in their company. The real motive that
appeared to to assigned to the prisoner and his
companion for their extraordinary condact was a
desire to make a profit out of the musical talent
possessed by the child.
Mrs. Smith, the mother, was called, and stated,
in answer to qtestions put by the learned judge,
that none of the child's apparel was missing except
a feather that was in her hat. Her clothes had,
however, been somewhat changed in appearance by
being trimmed
with black; in Act, for some object

or other, the prisoners seemed to have desired that'
she should appear to be in mourning.
Mr. Justice Byles inquired of the mother what
was the value of the clothes that were upon the
child when she was taken away ?
The mother replied, about 17s. 6d.
Clara Telson Smith, the child that was the sub-
ject of the inquiry, was examined, and although of
such tender age she, answered the questions put to
her very readily, and exhibited a good deal of con-
fidence. She confirmed the statement of her mother
as to the circumstances under which she was taken
from her home by the woman Elliott, and said that
when she was taken to Southampton she wanted to
return home, and she was told that she should go
home at the end of the week, but when that period
had elapsed she was told that she should not go
home at all.

Mr. Justice Byles asked the child whether she
performed anywhere while she was away with the
prisoner and Mrs. Elliott ?

The child said that she did not perform any-
where, and was not asked to do so. She also said

that they did not treat her in any way unkindly
while she was in their company.
The prisoner, when called upon for his defence,
declared that he was entirely ignorant of the cir-
cumstances
under which Sarah Elliott obtained
possession of the child, and he believed from what
she stated that she had brought the child away
with the consent of her mother. So far as he was
concerned he said that the child was an incum-
brance more than anything else, and, with regard
to appropriating her clothes, the fact was that they
bought clothes for her while she was with them.
The learned Judge, in summing up, said that the
case was, undoubtedly, a very extraordinary one,
and although every possible endeavour had been
made to bring the charge within the terms of the
statute, it appeared to :him very doubtful whether
any of the counts had been supported by the evi-
dence.
The jury, after a short deliberation, returned a
verdict of Not Guilty.
-Upon an application subsequently made by Mr.
Sleigh on behalf of the bail of the woman Elliott
her recognisances were respited to the next session.