The Sun.
London, England, 1859-09-19 00:00:00

TIIE ZO L TrE AND THE LADY.

On Saturda, at Worship-street Police-court,
Daniel Joseph Benholiel, residing in Bandon-road,
Victoria-park, Hackney, attended to answer a sum-
MODS obtained against him, by Mrs. Maria Jones, a
widow, of Bi uns wick-street, Hackney-road, to show
cause why he should not be adjudged the father of
her child, born on the 4th of July this present year.
The defendant who has frequently figured at this
court in a splendid Zouave costume, when seeking
advice in matters of refractory tenants, was, during
the Crimean war, interpreter to the French Marshal
Pelissier ; and on his return to England, about
three or four years since, met with the complainant,
at the house of her aunt, in York-place, Vauxhall-
road—hence th© formation of an acquaintance
alleged to have resulted in closer intimacy.
Mr. Vann, for the lady, stated the case, and her
examination elicited the following statement from
her :—The gentleman who is laughing (the defen-
dant) is the papa of my child, and he cannot deny
it ; he can't look at me. After seeing him at my
aunt's, when he came from abroad, I did not meet
him until about sixteen months since ; it was in the
sweet spring time. On the 4th of October last I
went by a card of invitation to his house in the
Mile-end-road. He has moved since that time,
He had another residence at Wandsworth, but I
did not go there. After staying the evening with
himrhe and his man-servant accompanied me home
to my sister's, but it was late, and we could not.get
in. He said that if I would return with him he
would protect me like a brother. I did return ;he
slept in a hammock, as is his custom, I believe, and
I rested on the sofa. I don't know whether the
hammock broke, but he disturbed me three times
during the night.
Witness here swore to the intimacy, and added
that she subsequently told defendant her situation,
who promised to see her through it.
Charlotte Haynes deposed that she had made de-
fendant acquainted with the " accident" that had
occurred to Mrs. Jones, and that he had given her
two shillings for that person ; but this witness ad-
mitted that no conversation ensued in which de-
fendant was mentioned as the father of the child.
Mr. Beard then cross-examined the complainant
—You have sworn that you are a widow, and your
name is Jones. Is it so ?
Complainant, hesitating—Well, I never was mar-
ried. I have a son by a person named Jones, since
dead.
Mr. Board—Did you ever have intimacy with
defendant's man cook ?

Complainant—With his cook ? No more than
with you.

Mr; Beard—Did you never ask that cook to swear
the child was not his, but his master's, giving, as a
reason, that Mr. Benholiel was a rich man, and that
the property would probably pass to that child ?
Witness—Never. I know that the cook has left
that service. My right name is Maria Levy. When
the defendant disturbed me as described, he said,
" Maria, my hammock has broken down." He
begged me not to make an alarm, as it would, dis-
turb his tenants. The cook was in the horse at
that time, but he did not understand Eyglish ;
therefore, he would not have understood avy alarm
had I made it.

Mr. Beard—Sir, I must denounce this proceed.
ing as an infamous conspiracy to effect the purpose
I have intimated. My client has bee,n at the ex-
pense of sending for the servantmi.n, the cook,
from France ; and, if it be necessary, I will show
by him that the intimacy was with him—with the
man, and not with the master, although manifestly
she preferred, for purposes that must be seen
through, the master to be consieAered amenable.

Defendant was then sworn, r,nd emphatically de-
nied any intimacy with the solf-styled widow.
The magistrate observed that he did not credit
the oath of the complaiurAnt, and dismissed the
summons without hearing, the cook.