The Sun.
London, England, 1858-04-15 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING,

he travelled ? I showed him his box, and the
prisoner
said it was too large, and he would buy him a
carpet-bag. On this occasion he gave me half-a-sove-
reign, Baying it was to get coals with, and something to
go on with. He told me to tell my husband, whEn he
wanted money, to come to him at the Cafe Suisse,
' and that he ought to have gone to him before.
My husband returned home in about half an hour after
the prisoner had left. I told him what had taken place,
and showed him the half-sovereign. On another evening
in that week I heard a ring, and my husband went dowa
to the door. I looked out of the window, and saw a man
like the prisoner, but I can't say it was him. My hus-
band left home on a Saturday. I never Eaw him again
in this country.

[At this point one of the jurymen was taken ill, and
had to leave the box. In a short time a medical gentle-
man said it would not be advisable to detain the jury-
man longer than the examination of the present witness
occupied.]
Lord Campbell—The CJurt, will readily assent to your
suggestion. The court shall be better ventilated to-
morrow.

The examination of the witness wag then proceeded
with—Before my husband left England the prisoner
gave me ten shillings to get my husband's coat
and waistcoat out of pledge. Idi I not find
the prisoner in my room when I returned from the
pawnbroker's. He (prisoner) came about nine o'clock
that evening, and I left him and my hu-band
together fur about five minutes. When I returned I

heard the prisoner say to my husband, "You'd go away
in the morning." I heard them talking together in a
foreign language. The prisoner told me to fetch a pint
of ale, and I did so. When I returned the prisoner and
my husband were still in conversation. Bernard wrote
several notes, but I cannot say what they were. I did not
see whether he gave them to my husband. My husband
went out and fetched a carpet bag. The prisoner said he
would give me 12s. a week while my husband was away.
He said he would bring it every Monday night. On
the evening before Bernard came we had no money, but
after he left I saw some foreign coins on the table. One
piece was like our crown, and the other was like a half-
sovereign. I did not hear the name of the street or place
to which any husband was going, but I heard him
say some'hing about "277." I heard the prisoner say
to my husband, " when you get to the end of the jour-
ney you will find somebody you know." I had no know-
ledge of where he had gone until I saw something in
the newspapers. My husband left London on a Satur-
day, about 9 o'clock in the morning. He took the car-
pet bag with him. He had only the clothes he had on.
I don't know that he had anything in the carpet bag.
I saw a passport in his possession.
Mr. James—Can you read ?
Witness—Not well.
Cross-examination by Mr. Welsby continued—My
husband read me some part of the passport. The docu-
ment shown to me is like the paper I speak of, but I
cannot tell whether it is the same. I believe the word
shown to me on the paper is in my husband's hand
writing. I cannot tell what. it is ; I can't spell it. On
the morning after my husband left I went to the Cafe
Suisse. I did not see the prisoner. I left a note for
him. My husband wrote it before he Id-. On the fol-
lowing day I saw the prisoner in Bateman's-buNinga.
He was waiting for me. I told him I had been to the
Cafe Suisse, and we then went up-taira. On that occa-
sion he gave me 10s. He told me to get plenty t f clothes
and warmth, as my husband would soon be home again. He
told me he had had a letter from my husband, in which
he said so. On the following Monday he came to Bate-
man's-buildings and gave me 10e., and told ins I must
leave the place. He asked me if I had not a grand-
mother in the country, and I said yes. He asked me
where, and I said in Nottingham. He asked if there
was a train to that place that day ; I told him no ; and
he then asked at what hour the train left in the
morning, and I told him helf-past seven. He said
I must go by that time, and said if I heard anything in
the papers about my husband I was to take no notice of
it. He then gave me a sovereign over the railway fare,
which was 10s. 83. He asked if I would sooner go to
my mother at Gadalining. I said no, and he then
said I was not to tell any ptr.on where I was going.
He said he would send me a fortnight's money
on the following Monday. He then asked
what my maiden name was, and I told him Booth. He
said I was to go in that name after I got down to Not-
tingham, and that the money orders would be made out
in that name. Toe letter was to be directed to the post-
office, and to be left till called for. He asked me if I
had told anybody where he lived, and I said no.
When he spoke to me about my husband's name ap-
pearing in the newspapers, I asked for what reason his
name should be in the papers, and he did not make me
any answer. He told rae if anybody asked rue about
my husband to say, "I knew be was very well." I
did not understand what he meant. let irted for Notting-
ham in the morning, as arranged. I gave up the lodgings
in Batemau's-buildings, and when I arrived at Notting-
ham I went by my proper name, Elias Rudio. Before
I left London I got a letter from my husband. Mrs.
Fay, one of the lodgers, read it to me. I don't know
what has become of the letter. I have endeavoured to
find it, in company with Sergeant Smith, but I have not
done se. The letter shown to ins I believe canoe to me
at Nottingham. I had returned to London, and the
letter was sent after me. I stayed in Nottingham six
days.
Mr. Powell wise here recalled. The letter the witness
speaks of is in the handwriting of the prisoner, to tie
best of my belief.
Mr. James—Did you ever a -e the prisoner write like
that letter I
Witnes,—l cannot say T have.
Mr. James-1 don't think that letter ought to be re-
ceived in evidence.
Lord Campbell, (to witness)—What is your belief
with respect to the handwriting?
Witness—To the best of my belief it is in his hand-
writing.
[The letter was then ordered to be received and read.
It stated that It2s. would be sent weekly to Mrs. Eliza
Booth, as long as she behaved properly, by William
Thompson.]
Cross-examined by Mr. Hawkins—l was married a
fortnight before Christmas, three years ago. My hus-
band lived at my aunt's at Baldwin's-gardens, when I
first knew him. I don't know that he followed any occu-
pation. I never made inquiries on the subject. He never
said a word about his occupation. Before we were
married he worked at the envelope making. He followed
that occupation for about three mouths afterwards.
Mr. James—My lord, I am desired to inform your
lordship that it will be dangerous to enforce the attend•
ante of the sick juryman any longer.
Lord Campbell—Then we will adjourn immediately.
Mr. James-P,rhaps your lordship will inform us
how we are to proceed at the termination of the trial with
respect to the points reserved. Whether we r.e to argue
them at length, or merely hand in our objecteons.
Lord Campbell—The objections must he limply
handed in. They will be reserved for the considerate n
of the 15 judges in the Court of Criminal Appeal.
The proceedings were then adjourned till to-morrow
morning at 10 o'clock.

THE BARONESS, THE CHEVALIER, AND

THE LIEIRESS.

A case which excited considerable interest has
just been decided by the civil court of Malta. The
following is a condensed statement of the most pro•
minent facts from the Malta Times : . . .

Antonia Muscati,abarone;inher own right,
the last of a very wealthy Maltese family, was in
1797 married to a military gentleman of French
extraction, the Chevalier Parisio. The couple
lived in happiness until the French invasion
under Bonaparte came to disturb for over their
conjugal tranquillity. It appears that during two
years that the French were masters of Valetta, be-
sieged by the population of the country, the cheva-
lier lived at his country seat at Naxaro, and, not-
withstanding his French origin, occasionally took
au active part against the invaders. The baroness
continued to live at Valetta, where, adopting the
republican ideas then prevalent about the validity
and dissolubility of previous marriages, she com-
mitted one of those faults which are sometimes
visited not merely on the sinner, but on innocent
victims of other gonerations. At the expulsion of
the French the chevalier returned to town, andfound
his honour tarnished ; from that time he Towed to
abandon his wife, notwithstanding her attractioue,
his comparative poverty, and her wealth, and to all
appearance?, up to the time of his death, which
took place i❑ 1840, ho kept his resolve, h• having
always lived at the Palazzo Parisi°, whilst the ba-
roness continued to live in her own hong&

" About the time of the chevalier's death a girl
came out of the House of Industry, an inatitution
for female orphans, and was married to a young man
named Saltiitro, a tailor. It soon became known to
this young couple that the marriage was pre-
arranged by the agenis of the Baroness Antonia,
and this leading the tailor to ingatiry, he began to
suspect from out-of-doors information, and from
avowals of his youthful bride, that she was the
daughter of the Baroness Aut Alia. The tailor fol-
lowed up the thread, and having gathered sufli-
, cient information, he in 1850 brought an action for
a subsidy, in the name of his wife, against the
baroness, and the Court of Appeal being satisfied
by the evidence the❑ produced decided in favour of
the plaintiff for the maternity.
" Iu the meanwhile the baroness had been mar-
riz d a second time to Baron Sir G. M. Depiro. She
died in 1856, leavingher unentailed property t )
whilst her free estates, the whole amounting it is said
o 3,0001. a-year, went to her collateral relations.
The daughter was left penniless. Soon after her
inothet's death she commenced a lawsuit against the
iestainentary heir and her mother's relatives, and
also her father's heirs de facto, asking for her legi
tiatey. Her birth, she said, which had already by
the Court of Appeal been established, had taken
Mace during her mother's marriage with the Cho-
' val er Parisi°. He was legally her father, and
n3aquently she was their legitimate offoiling.
The marriage which had been celebrated iu 1797
was only solved by the chevahalwireearirft'eoes.fdheearthleginitiml4oy,;
and between these dates there was nhoolllts judicialeiss,t
rbuu true
thatthisepa-
rationsthey e
on:
ne between husband and
deprive
epd
tion of the law is strengthenedft
ownasthneoctoliracilye,nsthteoconptinuesto sabyy,
ctliiriscupmrestsaunmepe 8-
her
onlyi_.
lmother'sinsisted. d
hthisatwciafeinweastomehreetl.y kapnpoawrleendtg,
tolenabthy.thTehcheesveaplaierratfioorn
tbheetweeyeenotfhethcehepvuableirc,al s
e and a
wasel