The Sun.
London, England, 1859-10-13 00:00:00

GUILDHALL.

David Hughes, solicitor, 13, Gresham-street, City,
charged with absconding and defrauding his creditors, was
again placed at the bar on a further charge of stealing
£l,OOO, belonging to Mr. Fair, at 10 o'clock this forenoon.
The evidence taken on the last sitting of the court was read
over and signed by the witnesses.

Mr. Pollard prosecuted, and Mr. Morgan (of the firm of
Messrs. Humphrey, Son, and Morgan) defended the pri-

goner.

Mr. John Satcholl, solicitor, produced an assignment of
a house, No. 13, Grove Villas, Highbury-barn, 30th April,
1855 ; term of lease, 98 years ; ground rent, £lO 4s. 9d. ; con-
sideration, £945 ; executed by the bankrupt and William
Anderson in witness's presence.

William Haynes was clerk to the bankrupt for 10 years,
and did not know of any business transactions in the matter
referred to in the letter of 16th January that required an
advance of £5,000.

Cross-examined—There were two common law clerks
and two conveyancing elerks in the office, and he could
find no entries in the book, either present or prospective, as
to the £5,000. An offer of busints‘ would not be entered
in his books unless something resulted from it. He could
not say the statement in the letter was false.
Re-examined—lf anything resulted from it it would have
appeared in the books, and he could not find it. Witness
was not aware that this letter had ever been written or an
advance of £5,000 afterwards to any person. This com-
pleted the evidence on this part of the case.
The next charge against him was under the Fraudulent
Trustee Act with receiving and not accounting for £B3O,
money received by him as bailee for Mr. George Fag on a
mortgage on houses, No. 5,6, 7,8, 9, and 10, in Shannon-
terrace, Dalston, for £l,OOO mortgaged by the prisoner to
his clerk, William Lewis, and assigned by him to Mr. Fag,
and by him to Mr. Gilbert.

Mr. George Fag—On 30th September, 1852, I lent £l,OOO
to some person I did not know on mortgage on property at
Dalston, and gave the money to the prisoner, and had the
mortgage deeds produced given to me. On 22d April,

1858, received the letter produced, informing him
that the property was sold and wanting up the title-deeds,
which wero given to him on the assurance that I would
got an equally good security for my money, or my money.
I afterwards received a letter from Mr. Haynes asking me
to complete the purchase, and I received on the 6th June,
8u
produced, but did not receive the £l,OOO,
byle edetdteerauthorised Mr. Gilbert to pay it to his solid-
tlorst,Bl th
the prisoner. I went out of town, and was absent
three weeks. A week after my return I was informed that
the prisoner had gone to Australia. I never received a
shilling or any security for my £l,OOO.
Cross-examined—l was to be paid interest for
it by the prisoner. The prisoner was to get me
a fresh mortgage. It was not understood that I was
to lose any interest—he said he would take care
of that. I did not receive the interest when the money
was paid. He did not say that he had any security for me
in June, when I signed the authority to pay him my money.
I did not expect him to pay me interest until he got me a
mortgage. Five per cent. was the interest, and not six.
Mr. Robert Gilbert, baker, 35, Union-street, Bishops-
gate-street, said he purchased the houses in question for
£1,030, and deposited 20 per cent. in the auction-room, £2OO.
On June 25, 1858, the purchase was completed, and he paid
£B3O as the balance, in Bank of England notes, to the pri-
soner. He received Mr. Tag's written authority to pay
him, and the deeds were handed over to witness. Mr. Tag
was not present at the time. Tho £2OO was paid to Mr.
Reynolds, auctioneer.
Mr. Thomas Ballantine Hewitson produced prisoner's
bank cash-book, and found £4 ss. &1., July 24, 185 S, was
the last transaction.

Mr. Henry Palmer was at Liverpool on the 6th April,
1858, and saw the prisoner and hi 4 family on board the
Red Jacket, bound fur Australia, and saw her towed out
of the harbour.

Detective officer James Brett proved his going after the
prisoner to Australia, and bringing him to this country.
The further consideration of the case was adjourned till
next Wednesday at 10 o'clock.
Mr. Morgan asked the bankrupt's watch and some per-
sonal property to bo given up, but Mr. Alderman Law-
rence declined to interfere, leaving the assignees to settle
the matter.

Mr. Polard said ho had no power to give up any personal
property of the bankrupt, and considering the great amount
of property taken by him, ho could not advise any to be
returned.

MARLBORO UGH STREET.
SINGULAR APPLICATION BY A SOLDIER'S WIFE.—THE
CONSEQUENCE or REFUSING TO JOIN.—A decont-looking
woman applied to the magistrate (Mr. Beadon) for his
assistance.
The applicant said she received an order at Preston, Lan •
cashire, to go to Southampton, and there go on board a
ship bound for Madras to join her husband, a soldier, at
Rangoon. She went on board with her two children, and
when near the landing stairs she jumped from the ship,
leaving ber two children on board, and mady her way to
London.
Mr. Beadon asked her why she did so.

The applicant said sbe was frightened to go the voyage.
She left the ship thinking they would give her her children.

Mr. Beadon said he could do nothing. He was not
going to send her back again. She should have stopped
and got her children out.
The applicant said the order came to her from the War-

office, but she did not wish to go. She had never been in
a vessel before, and she was frightened of the raty,, and her
children wanted to leave. If she had thrown. them out
they would have been killed. She asked the tuP4n who was
appointed over them from the shipping office, to give her
her children, but he refused. She then mai ie up her mind
to oome to London, and a lady gave her 4s. , and she had
pledged some of her clothes at Southampton I and came by the
ailway, Other had left the ship besides In T. If she had
gone the pay she had been receiving (10d . a day) would
have been stopped by the War-office. 11.er only brother,
who was a soldier in the 45th at Preston, b ad given her also
snob a description of the voyage that she . was frightened to
go, and she did not wish to leave her ha me.
Mr. Beadon said she had done the maddest thing she
could have done. She had abandoneel her children. He
was not at present satisfied with her statement. She had
better go to the War-office, and he •would send one of the
officers with her,
The applicant said it was all true).

Subsequently O'Shaughnessy, a very intelligent officer
of the court, and who used great diligence, reported that
he had been to the War office, and, was from there referred
to the Quartermaster-General's Ciffice at the Horse Guards,
where he received every assistance and information from
Col. Clifford, and which showed that the woman's state-
ment was quite correct. The colonel said he would tele-
graph to the office at Southampton to have her two children
disembarked. Ho also gave 11.0:.r an order to travel by train
from London to Southampton, and from Southampton to
London free ; and the colonel, who had behaved in the
kindest possible manner, also personally gave the woman
6s. to assist her on her journey, for which she seemed very
thankful.
The consequence of the woman's refusing the grant of
being passed to India to join her husband is that the allow-
ance of 10d. a day will henceforward be discontinued.