The Sun.
London, England, 1861-11-06 00:00:00

THE BOOKSTEALING BY TWO YOUNG lADIES.

It will be recollected that these two young ladies, who,
when taken into custody, gave the assumed names of Long
and Murray, were committed for trial by Mr. Henry, the
magistrate at Bow-street police court, for stealing books
from the shops of Mr. Carter and Mr. Lacy, booksellers in
the Strand. Mr. Humphries, who appeared for the pri-
soners, made a strong appeal to the magistrate to deal with
the case in a summary manner. The young ladies, he said,
were the daughters of a gentleman of affluence and high
position in society, and had been educated in India ; and
he 'could only account for the unfortunate position in
which his clients had placed themselves by imagin-
ing that they were suffering from a sort of mono-
mania, as their position placed them high above want,
and their moans of purchasing all they required were ample.
Mr. Henry refused to accedo to the proposition of the
learned gentleman, saying his duty compelled him to send
them both for trial, as the offence was not confined to one
act, but on the contrary they appeared to have been most
artfully contrived. The prisoners, it appeared from the
evidence, entered several booksellers' shops on the pretence
of purchasing books for school prizes, and whilst they were
being shown the articles they contrived to secrete several of
them in a black leather bag, which they carried underneath
their shawls ; and, in order to get out of the shop without
makingto a purchase,
fictitious
drthaedydeisrs.
directed the books they selected to
be

The counsel engaged for the two prisoners this morning
mentioned their case to the learned judge.
Mr. Bodkin said a great deal of unnecessary embellish-
ment had been made about this case; about the position
the girls previously occupied in society, and also tho affluent
circumstances of the father, who it was said was a gentle-
man much higher in position than any personpresent in the
police court when the girls were committed for trial.
Ho wished to know whether tho father was now present ?
The learned counsel said he was not. With respect to
the statements in the newspapers he was not accountable
for that.

Mr. Bodkin thought when he postponed passing sentence
yesterday some explanation would have been given that
morning. With respect to position in society he should not
let that have the slightest influence with him, as he should
deal with the case precisely in the same way as if it had
been that of the lowest person who swept the streets. With
respect to the reports in the newspapers, Mr. Humphries
must have made some observations of the nature he had
referred to, as he was not a gentleman likely to exceed his
instructions. As the father was not in attendance, he should
like to know if he would come supposing he again deferred
passing sentence until to-morrow.
The learned counsel said he did not think it was at all
likely he would attend. His appearance would only be at-
tended with great pain, and would lead to still greater pub-
licity.

Mr. Bodkin thought something ought to be known about
the prisoners for their own sake. He would either pass
sentence now or defer it until he was put into possession of
the circumstances connected with the prisoners.

The learned counsel said he would rather the case was
disposed of now ; the required information should bo sent
to the bench.

Mr. Bodkin would at once do so ; and if, after sentence
was passed, from what was communicated to him, he should
feel inclined to alter the punishment, he would make the
necessary application to the proper quarter.
The two young girls were then put in front of the dock.
Mr. Bodkin addressing them said they had both pleaded
guilty to an indictment, charging them with purloining
books, and both had declined to give the slightest in-
formation that might enable the Court to make
inquiries about them. It was not the case of
persons destitute of the means of existence, but they were
placed in a position much above that. They appeared to
have been well educated, and to have been taught the dif-
ference between good and evil. so position rather aggra-
vated the offence than otherwise. If he was satisfied by the
information that was to be forwarded to him that both of
them were to be sent out of England or to the colonies,
which he thought was the best thing that could be done to
enable them to retrieve their character, or that secure steps
would be taken to protect the public against a repetition of
the offence, he would communicate with the Government
with a view of obtaining a remission or alteration of the
punishment ho felt it his duty now to inflict. The sentence
of the Court was that they both be imprisoned and kept to
hard labour for the space of nine months.