The Sun.
London, England, 1859-12-23 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 23, 1869.

and left others in the drawing-room until 12 o'clock
at night. On many occasions they told witness to
go to bed, and Mr. Gibson would make the door
fast, she, however, declined to leave the door un-
fastened, because she thought they might not know
how to secure it. Almost every night when he
came she had to fasten the door after 12 o'clock.
Mrs. Hepworth went away on the 15th August,
and returned on the 18th. She went alone. On
the 19th she again left, but came back the next day.
During the visits of Mr. Gibson to Mrs, Hepworth,
witness once found the drawing-room door locked.
It was about five in the evening. She knocked for
admittance, but it was not op( lied, and MI s. Hep-
worth said she did not want tea yet. She knew that
Mr. Gibson was there. Mr. Gibson lately came to
Cliff-street with another gentleman, and asked her
what she had been saying about him. She told him
she had only said what was the truth. When she
saw the letter he had written to Mrs. Hepworth,
she felt indignant, and told all she knew. She in-
' formed him about the door being locked, and he
said, "But Cornwall was in the room, was she not ?"
She said she did not think so.

Cross-examined—Madame Cornwall was a lady
about 30 years of age. There was no communication
between her bed-room and the drawing-room. Mrs.
Hepworth and Madame Cornwall occupied the same
bed-room.

Jas. Bramner, a tailor and draper at Bristol—ln
August last Mr. Gibson was indebted to him in a
large sum. He hcd been unable to find Mr. Gibson.
On the 15th August he was at Rosherville Hotel,
at Gravesend, when he saw a cab drive up to the
door with Mr. Gibson and a lady in it. 'I he photo-
graphic portrait produced of Mrs. Hepworth was
that of the lady. It was about six in the evening.
Cross-examined—He had a process out against
Mr. Gibson, but unfortunately he did not have it
with him at Rosherville.
Elizabeth Green was chambermaid at the Rosher-
ville Hotel in August last. Recollected Mr. Gibson
and Mrs. Hepworth coming there. The lady said
they should require a bedroom for the night, but
about two hours afterwards she rang the bedroom
bell and said they would require another bedroom.
They did not sleep at the hotel that night. Did not
see the gentleman in the bedroom. The parties
dined in a private sitting room, and left at eight
o'clock. The sitting room adjoined the bedroom.
Cross-examined—The lady went into the bedroom
alone. The luggage was all taken into the bedroom
whon they first arrived. The folding doors between
the rooms were locked and the sofa drawn across the
door of the sitting apartment.
Re-examined—Before Mrs. Hepworth asked for
a second bedroom, a gentleman had spoken to wit-
ness about the parties.
Jas. Browning, waiter at the Rosherville Hotel,
remembered the parties coming to the hotel in
August. He generally corroborated the evidence of
the last witness. They paid for the bedroom, and
when they were going away Mr. Gibson said he
had changed his mind, and was going to London.
Charles Blake, employed at Bristol to register
the passengers of omnibuses, knew Mrs. Gibson ;
also knew a person called Miss Farley. He saw
her get out of a fly in the latter part of August of
last year. Mr. Gibson was walking up and down,
and she joined him: They took one of the stand
flys and went off together.

On cross-examination he said he had not seen
Miss Farley in London.
Mrs. Jones—Lived in Church-lane, Old Park,
Bristol. Kept a lodging-house, to which gentle-
men some times brought ladies. Had seen Mr.
Gibson there with a lady three or four times in the
winter of 1858. The lady went by the name of
Farley.
Cross•examined—Did not know the gentleman's
name when he called, or the name of the lady.
Had since seen the lady at Fendal's Hotel, near
the court. When the name of Mr. Gibson was first
mentioned to her the photograph was not shown. She
had seen it previously. She knew at once that it
was the portrait of the gentleman who had come
to her house.

William Evans, a fly-driver at Bristol, knew Mr.
Gibson when he resided at Mr. Teast's house.
Recollected his engaging his fly in June, 1858, and
was told to drive towards Stoke's-croft, and take
up a lady. He took up a lady, and then drove the
parties between six and seven miles along the Glo-
cester-road, and back to Bristol. It was dark when
he got back. The next morning he found some
lady's hair-pins in the handle of the fly. About a
fortnight afterwards he was engaged to take up
Mr. Gibson and the same lady. She had a little
child with her, but it was asleep.
Harriett Saunders knew Mr. Gibson, and was in
his company in June and July, 1858. She drove
with him in a fly five or six times, when unfortu-
nately he took advantage of her. H© had also had
connexion with her at Exeter. On one of the occa-
sions when she went in a fly with Mr. Gibson she
had a little boy with her.
Cross-examined—She had been introduced to Mr.
Gibson by a friend of his in Bristol. After the first
introduction she did not see him again for twelve
months. She had known him by sight, however,
for a long time.
This evidence closed the case of the respondent.
The following testimony was then adduced on
behalf of the petitioner.
Mrs. Hepworth, said she was the wife of Mr.
Hepworth, of Gloucester. Was married in 1853.
Since that time she had been engaged as a singer.
In September and October, 1858, the Gloucester
Militia were out for training., and Mr. and Mrs.
Gibson became remarkably
,intimate with her and
her husband. They drove out together, and that
intimacy continued until she left Gloucester.
That intimacy gave her some uneasiness. She
became jealous of Mrs. Gibson. Next saw Mr.
Gibson on the 21st 06tober, on her return from
Wolverhampton, where she had been singing
at a concert. Met him at Birmingham
but did not sleep there. She never had any impro-
per connexion with Mr. Gibson in 1858, either at
Birmingham or Wolverhampton. Went to Chelten-
ham for professional purposes, but had no improper
intimacy with Mr. Gibson there. While living at
Manchester-street, two lady friends were living with
her. Mr. Gibson very often visited there. He was
very musical, and they sometimes sang together.
They had frequently sung together in Mr. Hep-
worth's presence. She went to Ramsgate with her
children with the permission of her husband. On
the occasion of the door being, found locked she was
not alone with Mr. Gibson. Madame Cornwall
locked the door because she was unwell, and the chil-
dren kept running in. She called on Mr. Gibson in'
High-street, Ramsgate, five or six times, but only
once alone. She went to fetch a book, and rested
there about halt-an-hour, being very tired. When
she met Mr. Gibson on his way to Gravesend, she
did not do so by appointment. She had taken her
ticket to London ; but being in no hurry to reach
London, she was induced to stop at Gravesend to eat
whitebait. Mr. Gibson was going to meet his father.
She had not the least intention of staying at Graves-
end all night. Had an engagement for the next day
at Cheltenham. They went to the Rosherville
Hotel, and witness went into a bedroom, where, on
seeing some of Mr. Gibson's luggage, she imme-
diately asked the chambermaid to show her another
room. No improper intimacy had ever existed be-
tween her and Mr. Gibson at any time.
Cross-examined--On the night of the day she
was at Rosherville witness slept at the Euston
Hotel ; Mr. Gibson accompanied her to London,
and left her at the station. It must have been 11
o'clock when she reached her hotel. Mr. Gibson
left the train immediately on its arrival at the
station, in a great hurry, because he had seen
a creditor of his at Rosherville, who he thought
might have followed him. Would not swear that
she had not let Mr. Gibson know she was going
to London that day. It was very immaterial,
but her impression was that he did not know
she was going. She had known Mr. Gibson about
six weeks when she received the two letters
produced from him. She thought it was very in-
discreet of him, and she wrote, saying she did not
approve of his language. The week previously
there had been a great commotion on the part of
Mr. Hepworth because Mrs. Gibson had not made
her appearance as:promised, and he was very violent.
The letters, however, were very enigmatical, and
she did not know exactly to what Mr. Gibson
alluded. When she was at Ramsgate Mr. Gibson
came down there with his family. She told him so
on one of his visits to Manchester-street. ller hus-
band knew where she was. A short time ago she
opened a drawer of her husband's and took out all
the papers that were necessary for her. They were
not papers at all concerned with this suit. She
had received other letters from Mr. Gibson than
the two referred to, but none of them begun " My
darling Clare."
By e Court—Was only at Ramsgate once last
summer. Should be sorry to say how she went down,
whether by rail or boat. Could not at all remem-
ber, but thought it was by boat. Met Mr. Gibson
by accident in the High street the day after her
arrival.
Mrs. Cornwall deposed that she was a widow,
and resided in Manchester-street, Manchester-
square.onmo wern-
himfro
Mr Gibson occa-
sionally were residing with her. •
invitation.
from
e cwh
itlhde. petitionerpiNivi
ot irTha taenl yd.
Nllliasds
sk
• h Never
saw the least impropriety pass between him and
sv‘i'oaisi anl leyvevrisailtoeidleatthtele
rie
Ihvoiuthsebily.s.hieir3p
woit
that lady. Was at Ramsgate in August last. Mrs.
Hepworth's nurse and children
accompanied
her.
Mrs. Hepworth went down a day earlier to take
the time. Mr. Gibson visited them, and on the
the apartments. They lived together the whole of
occasion of his visits she was always present. Re_
membered locking the door because the children
annoyed her. Had called on Mr. Gibson wit"; Alm

- -
Hepworth. Never saw any improprieties pass be-
tween those parties.
By the Court—Never went to bed before Mrs.
Hepworth at Ramsgate. Half-past 11 was the
latest hour at which Mr. Gibson ever left the house.
Miss Somerhays also stated that she had never
known any undue intimacy to have existed between
Mrs. Hepworth and the petitioner.
After some further testimony the further hearing
of the case was postponed.
The following are the letters referred to :
" Bristol, Oct. 2tl) 185 S.
"MY OWN DARLING CLARE,—I was so disap-
pointed at not receiving even a short note from you
this morning, though, of course, from the tone of
your last I had no right to hope it. I was really
very ill and unhappy yesterday—ill, because I had
two of those dreadful attacks in my head, and
wretched on account of your letter ; and to make
matters worse Madame took it into her head to be
very disagreeable. It appears (but you must not
seem to know this, or he would, of course, guess
that I told you) that he told her the night we
were at Gloucester that you left your people at
Wolverhampton after the concert and came to
me at Birmingham, stopped there all night, and
came on with me in the morning. I have, of course,
said it was all a lie, so you must remember that the
train you left Birmingham by was the 9.20, while
the one I am supposed to have come by was the
10.20. It's rather lucky that the trains fit so well,
as it seems probable that we should have come that
way ; and as we have denied coming together it
would never do for us to admit it. I cannot tell
you how I hate that woman now, every day more
and more, and how happy I should be if we could
only be happy together. I know with you I should
be perfectly happy, and I am quite sure I would do
all I could to make you so; and I rather fancy I
should succeed—do you think I should ?I so long
for to-morrow evening, in the hope of hiving a few
lines from you, should you not be too busy to write
to this poor old child. If you have not written, do,
darling, write to me, and write kindly. I must
finish to-day, as 1 feel too ill to. write. My heart
beats just as it did the other evening.
" Yours fondly attached, " C.
" Mind, in case of accidents, destroy my letters
directly you have read them, as I think I now quite
understand his game."

" Bristol, Oct. 28, 1858.
"My own Darling Clare,—l was so delighted
with your letter received this morning that I hardly
know what to do with myself. What a dreadful
idea it is to think that you should have the power
of making me so miserable or so happy ! I wish
you would always try to do the latter, as it would
be so easy to you and so jolly to me. How could
you be so silly as to take such an absurd idea into
your head about the Bridgend letter ? I cannot
imagine what I could possibly have said to give
rise to any such notion, and really nothing was
further than that from my mind, so I sincerely
trust you will never again be so naughty. I did
not know what to think all day yesterday at not
hearing from you. I wrote you two letters, but
thinking that, perhaps, you did not wish to hear
from me, destroyed them both ; and now I am so
sorry I did not send one of them, as, perhaps, you
may have thought it unkind my not writing ; but
that was the only reason. I stayed down here till
the afternoon post was in, in hopes of hearing
from you ; but it was no go. About seeing you
to-morrow, you must not think it is
because I do not wish, as I would give all in the
world to again see you, but I really don't see how I
am to manage it, as were I to be away, my fat
friend would be sure to guess I was gone to see
you, so I must wait till next Friday, and meet you
in London. Write and tell me about what time
you will arrive. I see by the list I can write you
on Tuesday, Liverpool ; on Wednesday, Boston ;
and on Thursday, Lyne—is that right ?—and on
Friday I shall again see my darling ; how I do long,
my sweet one, to be again with you! Will you
not be able to stay in London over Sunday, as we
might have a jolly day together ? I wish I were
going to be at Liverpool with you. I think you
are wrong about our fair friend writing ; she tells
me that she offended George dreadfully that night
when I was asleep, and I fancy she did, as he
seemed in a very bad temper when we left. lam
very glad you are not coming by the boat to-mor-
row, as she told me this morning that she means to
go and meet it, as she fancies you are coming by it,
and that I should be there to meet you, as G. told
her you would be in South Wales till Saturday
morning. Won't she be sold—first at going for
nothing ? Can you manage not to let G. know you
are going to London, as he is sure to let her know,
and then she might insist on coming with me, which
would not add to my comfort in the slightest
degree ? Mind you write to-morrow before you go
home, and on Tuesday you will find a letter from
me at the post-office, Liverpool. Did you think
last night of that day week at Cheltenham ? I could
not, for the life of me, go to sleep, thinking how
happy I had been, how happy I could be with you,
and what a darling you are. Tho more I think of
you the fender I become, so you must promise me
never again to fancy by anything I say in my let-
ters it would be possible for me to change. I
always write my letters very fast, and never read
them over, so that I may very often express myself
badly ; so please think of that next time before you
write me such a very unkind letter as the Cardiff
one was; but yours of to-day certainly made up for
it, as it really was a dear, kind child to write to me
so nicely. Adieu, my sweet one, till Friday, warn
I shall expect you to be very affectionate.—Yours
fondly devoted, " CH.
"Mind and destroy my letters before you go
home."

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.—Dec. 22,

(Before the Assistant-Judge,)

Frederick Rogers, 25, was indicted for stealing a
box, containing a Chinese puzzle, and. two brooches,
of the value of £2, the property of the London and
South-Western Railway Company.
Mr. Metcalfe prosecuted; the prisoner was unde-
fended.

He surrendered in court. The offence alleged
against the prisoner was committed at Hounslow
station. The prisoner kicked a box which had
been left on the platform by the guard, and picked
it up.

After the foreman of the jury pronounced a ver-
dict of guilty, Mr. Gent; as anzicus curice, suggested
that in point of law the case did not amount to lar-
ceny, and one of the jury said the verdict had been
given without his concurrence.
The jury were thereupon directed to reconsider
their verdict, and ultimately they were dissharged
without giving a verdict at all.
Sarah Gale, 30, was indicted and convicted at the
last sessions f robbing a man of L 2 2s. 6d. in a
brothel in St. George-street, St. Giles's.
It appeared that she was an old offender, and had
undergone four years' penal servitude.
She stated that since she had come home she had
made every endeavour to earn an honest living,
and gate names and addresses of persons with
whom she had lived.
The learned Judge directed Mr. Foulsham, the
officer of the House of Correction, Westminster, to
make inquiry as to the truth of her statement, and
the report which he now presented to the Court
was very unfavourable to her; she certainly had
had three situations, but in each she had grossly
misconducted herself. Many efforts had been made
to reclaim her without avail, and she was deemed
incorrigible.
The learned Assistant-Judge sentenced the pri-
soner to four years' penal servitude.
Samuel Croome, a respectable-looking middle-
aged man, was indicted on Wednesday for having
embezzled several sums of money, amounting in
the aggregate to about £l6, which he had received
on account of Mr. Boulton, gas meter manufac-
turer, of Bagnigge-wells-road.
Mr. Sleigh and Mr. F. H. Lewis were counsel
for the prosecution. Mr. Metcalfe was for the pri-
soner.
The trial of this case lasted the whole day, and
had been fixed to be taken._

.--The prisoner had been in Mr. Boulton's service in
a confidential capacity, and the accounts produced
certainly showed a deficiency of money received by
the prisoner, but they had been kept in anything
but a business-like manner. The prisoner's defence
was, that it was a spiteful and malicious prosecu-
tion got up against him, in consequence of his hav-
ing been engaged with another person in the same
line of business, who had obtained an injunction
against the prosecutor for infringing a patent, and
that the prosecutor had got up this case as a trap
for him, This was emphatically denied. The
examination in chief as to the accounts, and the
areas examination lasted some hours.
Mr. Metcalfe made a long and very able ad-
dress to the jury, after which the learned Judge
summed up most carefully, and told the jury that
not only the prisoner, but the prosecutor, was under-
going the ordeal of a trial ; for on the one hand,
the prisoner was guilty of robbing his master Of
money he had received as his servant, and had
aggravated his offence by false accusations against
him ; or on the other, because a person with whom
the prisoner had had some Ixansactions, had ob-
tained an injunction against the prosecutor, he (the
prosecutor) had produced falsified books, made a
false charge for spiteful and vindictive reasons, and
had entered the witness-box to support that charge
by the basest and most infamous perjury. It was
a most serious issue between the parties, and he
commended thQ CAR to the most careful and serious
consideration of the jury.
The jury retired, and after about an hour's
deliberation, came iuto court, and returned a ver-

diet of guilty. The foreman. said they recom-
mended the prisoner to mercy, and they could not
but say that the books, in their opinion, had been
kept in a bad, careless, and loose way, which had
afforded the prisoner a temptation to commit
these frauds. That was why they recommended
him to mercy.
The Assistant-Judge said he should defer the
sentence until next Sessions, and well consider the
whole case, and he hoped to be able to remove from
his mind a good deal of the painful effect which the
infamous and detestable defence set up by the pri-
soner had produced. He entirely agreed in the
verdict of the jury, and the prisoner, instead of
doing anything in the way of reparation, had
greatly added to the wickedness of his conduct.

The prisoner, who had surrendered to answer the
charge, was then removed to Coldbath-fields.
(Before Mr. Creasy.)
Dennis Murphy, the younger, aged 25, a perfect
picture of a desperate ruffian, was convicted of
robbing his father of 4s. 11d.
The prisoner had been before convicted at the
Old Bailey, and had been a curse to his parents.
The offence he was now convicted of was robbing
his father while he was asleep. They lived at 29,
Burn-street, Marylebone.
Mr. Creasy sentenced the prisoner to ten years'
penal servitude.
The prisoner's conduct to his father while in the
dock was shocking, and his parting wish cannot be
given.

- John Thomas Stevens, a drayman, was indicted
for feloniously embezzling three several sums of
9s. which he had received on account of Frederick
Lightfoot, brewer, of Oxford-street.
The prisoner was found guilty, and sentenced to
eight months' hard labour.
Mr. Metcalfe and Mr. Dickie prosecuted ; Mr.
Ribton was for the prisoner.
Emma Haydon and Harriet Taylor, two prosti-
tutes, were found guilty of robbing a man named
Ferguson of his watch.

Ilayclon wat not so bad a character as Taylor,
who had been before convicted of a similar offence.
Haydon was sentenced to eight months' hard
labour, and Taylor to three years' penal servitude.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE—Dec. 22.

CLERKENWELL.—LAPORTANT TO THE PUB-
mc.--George Pulling, of the Belmont-wharf,
Maiden-lane, and 19, River-street, Islington, ap-
peared before Mr. Tyrwhitt on a summons which
charged him with having, on the 23d of November
last, unlawfully and knowingly sold to Mr. Matthew
Wilson one sort of coals for a sort which they really
were not, contrary to the provisions of the Ist and
2d William the Fourth, chap. 76, sec. 45.

This case was one of the greatest importance to
the public, owing to the number of persons who
advertise their shops and houses as being depots for
the sale of the Great Northern Railway Company's
coals, and appointed by the company. •
From the evidence it appeared that the defendant
waited upon the complainant's wife in the month
of November last, and asked her for an order for
coals. At this time he produced a card, which was
headed " Great Northern Railway Coal Company,"
and on which was the prices of the several descrip-
tions of the coal. The complainant believing that
he was the agent of the railway company ordered
two tons at the highest price on the card, viz.,
" Best Wallsenn" at 245. per ton. The coals were
delivered at dusk the next evening, and with them
a vendor's ticket, on the top of which was " Great
Northern Railway Coal Company, chief office, Bel-
mont-wharf, York-road, King's cross," but at the
bottom the word " railway" was not inserted. The
coals were of such an inferior quality that they
would not burn, in consequence of which the com-
plahaa.nt wrote to the defendant, asking to see him,
but instead of calling himself, he sent his wife, who
said that the coals were very bad, and that she
would have them taken back, and fresh coals sent
in their place. This, however, not being done, the
defendant was again, written to, but no notice was
taken of the communication, in consequence of
which the complainantlitOled in Mr. Dix, the coal
inspector of the Oreat Northern Railway, who said
the coals, instead of being the " Best AVallsend,"
were nothing but the commonest sort of coal, viz.,
" Barnsley soft," and that instead of being worth
245. per ton, which the defendant had charged, the
trade at the time were being served with Barnsley
soft, at 14s. 6d. per ton. The complainant finding
that he could get no redress from the defendant,
took out the present summons, since which the de-
fendant had waited upon him to induce him to com-
promise the matter, but this the complainant re-
fused to do upon public grounds.
A Solicitor, who attended for the defence, said it
was a mistake. The defendant was only agent for
a person at Belmont-wharf, and all the coals he
sold he had 2s. per ton commission. The defendant
was well known, and had within these few weeks
sold over 100 tons of coal.
The complainant here produced the vendor's
ticket, and remarked that the defendant's name was
printed on it, but not as thu agent for another
person.
Mr. Tyrwhitt said if the defendant received
money for one sort of coal and sent another, he
must take the conseciur,nces. Ho believed that what
the defendant had. Laid about being agent was a
mere subterfuge. Ile could tell the defendant that
there were Cases in the books where persons had
been indicted;ik obtaining money under false pre-
tences, and. that under precisely similar circum-
stances to the present. This was one of those
transactions which fell very hard, particularly upon
the smaller class of housekeepers, and he did not
think that it was a case that ought to be compro-
'raised. The better class of coal VMS being constantly
mixedwith inferior coal, and that by persons of the
same class as defendant. The owners of good coal
deplored that it was done, for it cast a stigma upon
them which they did not deserve. It also cast a
stigma upon the country generally ; for foreigners
instead of believing as they used to do, that every-
thing in this country was free from adulteration,
now imputed to us the contrary. As there was no
desire on the part of the complainant for the inflic-
tion of the full penalty, and as this was the first
case that had come before him for some time, ho
should order the defendant to pay a fine of £lo—
£5 for each ton, instead of £lO for each ton, or, in
default of payment, three calendar months' impri-
sonment in the House of Correction. If any other
case of the sort came before him heshould most cer-
tainly inflict the full penalty.
The defendant, not having the money, was locked
up in default, at the same time saying that he
should appeal against the decision.