The Sun.
London, England, 1857-12-02 00:00:00

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS, Dee. 1.

(Before Mr. Bliss, Q. C.)
George Cooper and Henry Rutland were in-
dicted for stealing a quantity of bed linen, the pro-
perty of William Norman, in his dwelling-house.
Cooper pleaded guilty.
Mr. Payne appeared for the prosecution, Mr.
Ribton for Rutland.
The property mentioned in the indictment was
seen safe about 8 o'clock on the evening of the 18th
of Nov., and about 9 the same night Charles Cole,
a policeman, in plain clothes, saw the prisoner
came out of Tottenham-street, the prosecutor's
house being in Gower-place, and go up to a cab on
the rank. Cooper was carrying a large bundle.
Rutland opened the cab door, and Cooper partly
put the bundle in, but, observing that they were
watched, they went to another cab, when, finding
the plain clothes man still had his eye upon them,
they held a short conference behind the vehicle, after
which they threw the bundle down, and went away
at the top of their speed, Cole, of course, giving
chase on suspicion. He caught Cooper just by the
Queen's Theatre, and Rutland was captured by a
policeman and a postman, whose attention had been
called by the cry of " Stop thief I" Cooper told
the officer it was like his impudence to stop him,
and if he had not taken that liberty he should have
caught the thief. The bundle contained the pro-
perty stolen from the prosecutor's house, which had
been opened by a false latch-key. The defence set
up by Rutland before the magistrate was that he
had only met Cooper by chance, and knew nothing
of the bundle.

Mr. Ribton addressed the jury for Rutland, and
at the suggestion of the prisoner, and with the
sanction of the Court, called Cooper as a witness
on his behalf. He swore that he did the robbery
all by himself, and met Rutland by accident about
20 yards from where they were first seen by the
policeman. In cross-examination he said he did
not know how many different names he had gono
by ; nor how many times he had been in prison.
The jury, without hesitation, found Rutland
guilty, and it was proved that he was a regular
companion of known thieves. There was a previous
conviction against Cooper.

•
Mr. Bliss sentenced the latter to four years' penal
servitude ' Rutland to hard labour for one year.
Michael Brian and Michael Barratt, labourers,
were indicted for unlawfully inflicting grievous
bodily harm upon C. Kimber, a police-constable,
while in the discharge of his duty.
Mr. Cooper prosecuted ; Mr. Orridge and Mr.
Horny were for the prisoners.
The prisoners were fighting in Hyde-park on the
20th of September, when the prosecutor, who was
the policeman on duty, parted them, and wished
them to go home. In a few minutes they resumed
the fight, and he again interfered, and said if they
did not desist he [should lock them up. Barratt
said it would require the whole force aad more to
take him, and immediately threw the constable
down and jump 2d. upon him, breaking his leg and
disloeatiug his ankle. Another constable and a
parson named Goodheart, who went to his assist-
ance, were also assaulted by both prisoners.
• The defence was that the injury sustained by the
policeman was the result of accident, and that if
guilty at all the prisoners were guilty only upon the
minor charge.
The jury found them guilty, and
Mr. Bliss sentenced Barratt to 12 and Brian to
two months' hard labour.

Ambrosine Le Blanc, 27, a French governess, a
person with a countenance remarkably expressive
of cunning, was indicted for stealing a gold watch,
a silver watch, a quantity of clothing, money in
notesand gold, avariety of trinkets, &c., altogether
of the value of about 601., the property of Elizabeth
Horsford, Richard Waters, and Petec Easton, in
the dwelling-house of the first named.
Mr. Cooper appeared for the prosecution ; the
prisoner was not defended.

- The circumstances of this cas3, particularly thos e
relating to the apprehension of the ['prisoner, were
of an extraordinary character, and the robbery the
prisoner committed was one of the most impu-
dent, heartless, and ungrateful ever heard of.
The prosecutrix, Elizabeth Horsford, was a
widow, living at the lodge of a villa in Regent's-
park, belonging to a gentleman named Bishop, and
in the early part of September the prisoner called to
make some inquiry of her, and, finding her a person
of easy and charitable disposition, the prisoner, it
would seem, singled her out as the victim of a
subtle scheme of plunder. She excited her sym-
pathy by recounting her struggles and trials as a
governess, and the sufferings she bad undergone
since she left her native place, and made use of the
name of a Catholic clergyman, the Rev. Mr. Mar-
tin, and she told her tale so well, that it had the
desired effect, and Mrs. Horsford told her that as
she was friendless and homeless, as she had repre-
sented, she might stay with her until she procured
a situation, which would not be inconvenient, as
the family was then out of town. Fur about eight
weeks the prisoner ate, drank, and slept at the
lodge, free of cost, Mrs. Horsford being actuated
by purely benevolent motives. One day in Oct.,
Mrs. Horsford left the lodge about 11 in the morn-
ing, to go to market, thinking that the lodge would
be as safe in the prisonet's charge as her own, but
when she returned she found that every box and
drawer in the place had been ransacked, and every
available article stolen. The prisoner was gone.
Mr. 13'shop's groom had left his trunk in charge of
Mrs. Horsford at the lodge, that was taken away,
and the other things taken not Mrs. Horsford's be- ,
longed to a nephew of hers. Just before this the
prisoner had represented that she had obtained a
situation in a gentleman's family at Eppiug as
governess to the young lady, but that was a false-
hood to throw Mrs. Horeftird off her track. The case
was placed in the hands of Parsons, 182 D, who as-
cohabited washeawpernistoner
certaieedlthat a man with whom the prisoner had
n Aylesbury Gaol, and to
Aylesbury
to him, thinkin,,, of furc to see if any letters came
prisonero-irse that after escapit g
withl such a booty thefor
rulhd write to him.
He was correct in this surinke
atd
derlt)
sossttdb rtoougt
the
a letter, in female handwriting°
man. The officer concluded that this man, upon his
release, would make f .r where the Woman wm, so 1

' ho disguised himself as a journeyman saddler out of
work, and contrived, when the man was let out of
gaol, to get into his company, and they tramped
along the road together to Wycombe, where they
slept that night. Next morning the man said he
was going on to Windsor. The disguised officer
suid that was just the very place he was going to.
When they got to Windsor the man said he was
going to remain there some days, and on parting
with him the policeman went off to the railway
station, where shortly afterwards his friend made
his appearance, and inquired about a train for Rich-
mond. He took a ticket for that place, so did the
policeman, but unknown to him; and on getting
out of the train at Richmond the policeman,
who was intending to watch him, heard him in-
quire for Rosedale-house. Knowing w here Rosedale-
house was situated, he hurried thither, and found
that a person answering the description of the pri-
soner was engaged there as governess—Rosedale-
house being a scholastic establishment—and en
seeing her he was satisfied she was the person he
was in quest of, and to her amazement told her she
was his prisoner. She was then wearing Mrs.
Horsford's gold watch, and a great portion of the
stolen property was found in her possession. Some
she said was hers • some she acknowledged was
Mrs. Horsford's. While he was searching her boxes
a letter, written in French, arrived from the man
who had been discharged from gaol, in which he
informed the prisoner that he was in the immediate
vicinity, and had preferred writing to acquaint her
of that circumstance to making a personal appear-
ance at Rosedale-house, as ho might bo suspected.
The letter was written in a very affectionate strain,
and contained many expressions of love and attach-
ment, and kisses innumerable. The officer.at once
brought the prisoner and the property to London,
and the whole of the articles found in her posses-
sion, except some new silk dresses, which, there was
every reason to believe, were purchased with the
groom's money, were identified by Mrs. Horsford;
the notes had not been traced, but about 121. in
gold was found upon her, which the groom would
receive.

The prisoner addressed the jury at considerable
length in broken English, and shed tears, and ap-
peared almost overcome with emotion, as she as-
serted her innocence and defended her reputation
from thestain cast upon it. She said she first be-
came acquainted with Mrs. Horsford in August,
when she inquired of her if sho knew where she
could get apartments near the park. Mrs. Hors-
ford said she had a Mend whom she thought could
accommodate her, but, finding that she could not,
she offered to let her lodge with her, which she
agreed to, and paid her IL per week all the while
she was there. Mrs. Horsford had a domestic mis-
fortune which rendered pecuniary assistance neces-
sary, and she applied to her for a loan of 251.,
which she advanced, and received as security the
deposit of these articles. She obtained a situation,
which she had to go to at once, and as Mrs. Hors-
ford could not let her have her money, she took
the things away with her. She denied that she
went away clandestinely, Mrs. Horsford having
known for a week that she was going, and said it
was a cruel thing to crush a poor governess. She
had no friend, no parent in the world. She had
applied to the French Consul for assistance, which
had been refused her ; but this was a noble country;
its jurors were upright and intelligent men ; and to
those who were trying her she would appeal, not for
mercy because she was a foreigner and unprotected,
but for justice to a fellow-creature whose character
had hitherto been irreproachable.

Mr. Cooper proposed to recalMrs-Horeford, to aek
her as to the truth of the prisoner's statement
about the things having been given to her as a secu-
rity for aloan. _

Mr. Bliss said that there was no necessity to do
so. The prisoner had full command of language,
and had not asked one word in cross-examination
about any loan, and she had not called h©r as a
witness.

A juryman said it would perhaps be better if
Mrs. Horsford answered the question.
Mr. Bliss—Prisoner, do you wish Mrs. Hors-
ford to be asked if you lent her money, and she
gave you these things as security ?
Prisoner—Oh dear, no ; not at all. I leave my
case with you.
The jury found her guilty.
Mr. Cooper said the prisoner, he was informed,
two years ago had apartments which she left
without paying the rent ; and she had already
begun to rob the lady she went to live with
at Richmond, when she was taken on this charge.
He thought it his duty to add that there had been
great laxity on the part of the Rev. Mr. Martin in
recommending her to places when he knew so little
about her real character. She was a pretty
governess indeed.
Mr. Bliss said he never beard of a worse case,
and if there had been any previous conviction proved
against the prisoner he should have sentenced her
to penal servitude-for a long time. As it was, he
should sentence her to one year's hard labour.