The Sun.
London, England, 1867-05-31 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY

BRITISH. POSSF.

100
100
100
all
100
100

2.1.0
29i
2.11.6

2.14:011
8.3.0
3.9.0
11.2.0

all
1 t. 9.0

5.10. P
5.10.0
13.17.C'
1.10.4 p

38i
1.4.11
2.13.1
7.1.6

3.2.6
,35.15.6

5M
5.17.0'

5 7
4 6
370 390
1 11
18 20
5 6
3 31
2 3
i 4
9 10
31 3/
4 5
18 17

17 186
11 16
3: 34
51,1
7 0
31 'a
2 11
35 45
11 13

4i 5
2} 21
26 2z
310 330
1 II

3i ii
32 14

4 14
9 .1
6S 70
130 140
65 70
23 25
11 13
05 115
10 12

lt3 2&

109/ i

In lot

,ITIE3.

101
98

86i 7

"Sittings in Banco before Lord Chief Justice Cock-
burn, and Justices Blackburn, Mellor, and Shee.)

G@LDBERRY V. BUACK.

In this case, which was tried before Mr. Justice
Lush and a common jury yesterday, a verdict was.
returned for the plaintiff for over £IJ. It appeared
that the plaintiff had purchneed some goods, and
according to the statement of the defendant,
she, not having the entire money to pay for
them, she applied to her to make her an advance,
and that she lent her £2O, taking some of the goods
as a security. The plaintiff alleged that the goods
were sold to her, and the action was brought to
recover the difference between the account given
her and their value.

The defendant, who is a laxly, and spoke with a
foreign accent, applied to the court in person this
:norning for a new trial, on the ground that she
!iad a person who could give material evidence in
her behalf.

The Lord Chief-Justice explained to her that she
must have an affidavit to that effect, and that the
court would most probibly grant her rule.
Mr. Justice Lush, who was present, stated that
an attorney had entered an appearance for the lady,
bat refused to proceed further with the case, as she
did not supply him with the necessary funds.

BAIL COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Lush and a Common Jury.)

STACY V. FORTH AND WIFE.

Mr. Burch appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. J.
0. Griffiths for the defendants.

This was au action brought by the plaintiff, who
is a milliner, carrying on business at Weston-
Super-Mare, and the action was brought for goods
supplied to the female defendant. The defendant
plea ling denying the debt, and stating that the
female defendant was a minor' when she obtained
the goods, to which the plaintiff replicated, alleging
that the articles were necessaries, and such as the
rank of life in which the lady moved justified her
in supplying her with.
Mr. Burch opened the case. The female de-
fendant was the wife of Captain Firth, who
resides at Weston-super-Mare, was highly con-
nected, and to all appearance a gentleman of good
means. In June, 1855 and 1856, she was living at
the house of a lady and gentleman named Wynd-
ham Lewis, persons of large fortune, and had a
residence and estate near Weston-super-Mare,
and Captain Frith was in the habit of
meeting them frequently. lie became attached
to the female defendant, whose maiden name was
Sharland. Mrs. Lewis having died in 1866 Mr.
Lewis broke up his establishment and removed from
the neighbourhood. The female defendant then
took lodgings at Berkeley-terrace, in Weston-super-
Mare, and while remaining here she was in the
habit of visiting at the horse of a gentleman
of fortune, named Barchy, an uncle of
Captain Frith, who, with his wife, resides
at llamond's works, near Super-Mare. Mrs.
Barclay was a customer of the plaintiff's, and from
that circumstance and the society in which the female
defendant moved, she allowed htr to have the articles
in question without any hesitation. It appeared
also that the lady informed her hat she was about
to be married to Captain Frith, rq hose friends would
advance £2,000 to establish him some profitable line
of life, and that £l,OOO would le settled on her on
the day of her marriage. The marriage took
place in June, 1866, and the plaintiff applied to
the female defendant for £25 Off the debt, which she
had promised to pay her in that month. She received
a letter in reply, stating thatthe lady was unable to
pay the money then, but promising to do so shortly.
The plaintiff made another application, and the
female defendant sent her £5 all the money she had
received from her, and the anion was to recover the
difference. It was also statcdby the learned counsel
that Captain Frith very of ter came to her establish-
ment in company with M.s. Frith prior to the
marriage, and that some of ;he goods were sent to
his house and to Mr. B

Miss Susan Stacy, the ilaintiff, deposed to the
facts in the preceding narrative.
111 r. Sharland, father d :\lrs F. i:h, provel that
his daughter was under rge when she obtained the
goods.
The plaintiff WM no:i•suit:d.

POLICE INTELLIGEgCE.—This Day.

--~ --

MARLBOROUGJ-STREET.

ATTEMPTED FRAUD ON TIE UNIVERSAL BENEFI-
CENT SOCIETY.--Mary Woocham, a woman with a
child in her arms, was brouglt before Mr. Knox on
a warrant by Paine, one of the warrant officers,
charged with endeavouring t< obtain charitable con-
tributions, under false preteices, from the Universal
Beneficent Society, No. 10, Duke-street, St.
James's.

The Marquis Townshead, the president of the
society, was in attendance.
Mrs. Ann Greely, in tie employ of the society,
said that on the 16th the prisoner came to the office
of the society crying, an 4 said that she had lost a
child, eleven years of age,the previous day, and she
asked for pecuniary assisttnce. She told the pri-
soner that she would take down her name and ad-
dress and give them to the secretary, and she did so.
The next day the prisoner called again, and said
she had lost another child. The secretary took
down the statement.

Mr. Charles Kennedy, inquiring officer to the
society, proved that there vas no such place as the
address given by the prisoner ; and, in making in-
quiry of Dr. Miskin, the doctor the prisoner
stated to have attended the deceased children,
that gentleman stated that he had attended no
person of the name of Woodharn ; and, on making
other inquiries respecting the prisoner, he found
that she had lost no children, and that all the state-
ments made to the society were false. On the pri-
soner being asked how shq came to do such a thing
she said she was put up to it by another woman
who received assistance from the society under a
similar application.

Dr. George Miskin, 162, York-road, Lam-
beth, stated that he had never attended Any sick
children belonging to the prisoner.
During the examination the prisoner having ap-
peared to be in a fainting condition, Mr. Knox
a6ked Dr. Miskin if there were any grounds for
putting off the inquiry, and the doctor said there
were not.

said that on taking the
prisoner Price,
into
warrant aursrtaond ty officer,s
h said
she was very sorry,
and he hoped the marquis would forgive het, and
she had nut Leen put
The prisoner asked to be forgiven for the sake of
suhpe:ovoiut.ld not have done it if
the children.
Mr. Knox said it was a bad case, and the most
horrible part of it was that there was not a poor per-
son in London who was not worse off for acts like
that the prisoner had been guilty of.
prisoner
beggar, pretending
The,
prisoner had gone to
thoatbl
ealilllt,hepzttrniteilnisg,o&fTheregular
P
the society, and told thew a tissue of lies. She would
be committed for three 'oaths with hard labour.