The Sun.
London, England, 1844-03-30 00:00:00

CLERKENWELL.

A fashionably-attired young man wearing mousta-
chios, and described on the police-sheet as William Bur-
ton .Newenham, No. 31, Upper Berkeley-street west,
Portman-square, gentleman, was charged with the ab-
duction of Frances Louisa Wortham, the daughter of a
widow lady living in No. 39, Gerrard-street, Coburg-
road, Islington.
Mr. Southey, of Ely-place, Holborn, attended for the
prosecution, and Messrs. Sherwood and Vincent, soli-
citors, Temple, for the prisoner. Allen, tipstaff of the
Court of Chancery, was in Court, bearing the Lord
Chancellor's warrant for the prisoner's apprehension.
It appeared from the evidence of Mrs. Wortham
(mother of the young lady), who is possessed of a consi-
derable independence, that in June, 1842, her husband
died, bequeathing a property of about 4001. per annum
to his daughter Frances, when she became of age. In
December, 1842, Miss Wortham, who was then fourteen
years of age, was made a ward of Chancery. The pri-
soner (whose occupation is unknown), came to lodge with
Mr.Wortham in 1840, and remained alodger there up to the
12th of October, 1842, when he left. In October, 1843,
he became a visitor at Mrs. Wortham's again, and on
the morning of the 13th of that month, Mrs. Wortham
went out, leaving the prisoner and her daughter in the
house. Upon her return, at eight o'clo3k in the evening,
she found they had gone away in the course of the day.
The prisoner left a note, stating that " We are gone to
Fuinival's Inn." She never saw them afterwards, until
the previous (last Thursday) evening, when her daugh-
ter and the prisoner were together. She gave the pri-
soner into custody.
In answer to questions from the Magistrate, witness
stated that she was the only guardian of her daughter
—that she had never given permission to the prisoner to
remove her, and that he was fully aware of Miss
Wortham's fortune.

Mr. Southey requested that the prisoner might be re-
manded.

Allen (the tipstaff of the Court of Chancery) inquired
whether he should not take the prisoner into custody on
the Chancellor's warrant. He produced two orders of
the Court of Chancery, dated the 18th and 22d of De-
cember, 1843, the former of which was granted on the
petition of Mrs. Wortham, presented on the 16th of
the same month, forbidding all intercourse of any
kind whatever between the ward and the prisoner,
and requiring the latter to appear before that Court on
the following Friday and to deliver up the ward to her
mother. The second order directed the prisoner's arrest
and incarceration for disobeying the first. The tipstaff
conceived he was authorised to take the prisoner into
his custody, and instanced the case of a person who was
charged at Worship-street Police-court with assaulting
a sheriff's officer, but delivered up to him (the tipstaff)
by Mr. Broughton, the 3 sitting magistrate, on his
presenting the Lord Chancellor's warrant against the
prisoner for the non-payment of money into the Court
of Chancery.
Mr. COMBE said, that was quite a different case. He
would remand the prisoner if no good reason could be
shown to the contrary.
The prisoner said, Mrs. Wortham had given her con-
sent to the removal of her daughter. Mrs. Wortham
left the house on the 13th, declaring she did not intend
to return again—he had furnished her house in Gerard-
street, and had been in Scotland since October; he re-
turned yesterday with the view of affecting an ami-
cable arrangement with Mrs. Wortham, but she gave
him into custody. He wished the young lady herself
to appear in Court as a witness.
Mr. COMBE said he would not examine her at present,
and inquired where she was,
Inspector Penny said she was under his care.
Mr. COMBE ordered him to give her up to her mother,
and remanded the prisoner until Wednesday next.
Mr. C'. F. Smyrke, a builder, residing in Bagnigge-
Well's-road, was charged with violently assaulting Mr.
James Johnson, residing at No. 16, Wharton-street,
Lloyd's-square.
The parties had some difference about a business tran-
saction. The complainant went to the house of the de-
fendant, and in his absence used language of a grossly
abusive nature to Mrs. Smyrke, who acquainted her
husband of the complainant's bad language on
his return. Mr. Smyrke sent a letter to Mr.
Johnson on Wednesday last requesting him to come
to his house and explain his conduct. Mr. John-
son came accordingly. A quarrel ensued, plaintiff
and defendant applying the epithets " scoundrel,"
"rascal," unsparingly. At length Mr. Johnson called
Mr. Smyrke a d—d thief, whereupon the latter struck
him ; a fight ensued, in which the complainant got so
severely beaten that he declared he was scarcely able
to stand upon his legs, and he seemed in a very weakly
condition.

Mr. COMBE bound the defendant in his own recog-
nizance to answer any charge which might be preferred
against him at the Sessions, observing that the com-
plainant's conduct towards Mrs. Smyrke was unmanly
and improper, and calculated to excite the anger of a
husband.