The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1853-03-29 00:00:00

ANOTHER ROBBERY BY A SERVANT.

Elizabeth Carr (16) was charged with having, at Parr,
on the 22nd of January, in the dwelling-house of Mr.
John Rigby, feloniously stolen one shawl, one loaf, one
pair of boots, and various other articles, the property of
the said John Rigby ; and that after having committed
the said felony, she did burglariously break out of the
said dwelling-house. The prisoner, as in the last case,
was a domestic servant in the prosecutor's house ; and
after committing the robbery, early in the morning, broke
out of the house. She was found guilty, and sentenced to
six months' imprisonment, his Lordship remarking that,
from the similarity of the circumstances of the two cases,
it was exceedingly probable that an agreement had been
made between the two prisoners to rob their respective
employers, and afterwards make their escape.

HIGHWAY ROBBERY IN lIAIGH PARK.
James Nelson (28), Joseph Nelson (34), and Thomas
Latham (26), were charged with having, at Haigh, fe-
loniously and violently assaulted Mrs. Alice Woodcock,
putting her in bodily fear, and stealing from her person a
gold watch, chain and key, and one gold pencil case. The
two prisoners Nelson were charged with stealing the
articles from the prosecutrix, and Lathom was charged
with receiving the same, knowing them to be stolen.
Mr. Monk and Mr. Ovens conducted the case on the
part of the prosecution. Mr. Tyndal Atkinson defended
the two Nelsons. Lathom was undefended.

It appeared from the case, on behalf of the pro-
secution, that on the 31st of July last, about twelve
o'clock at noon, the prosecutrix, Mrs. Woodcock, who
is the wife of Mr. John Woodcock. banker, of
the Elms, Wigan, was walking among the plantations
in the grounds at Haigh-hall, near Wigan, the seat of the
Earl of Balcarres, when the prisoner, James Nelson, who
is one of the Earl of Balcarres' gamekeepers, came across
on to the carriage drive, as if intending to meet her.
The prosecutrix, on seeing the prisoner, who apparently
had nothing more on than a long shirt, turned back, and
in a few moments afterwards the prisoner took a round
and again met her. On coming up to prosecutrix, he de-
manded her to take her chain off her neck and give it to
him. She replied, "Do not take it from me, or you will
be taken up." Prisoner replied, " Oh, never mind
about that, give me what you have ;" and he then
took from her her watch, chain, and seal, and the
pencil case. The prisoner and Joseph Nelson were
immediately afterwards seen by several parties running
away from the direction in which the robbery was com-
mitted. A reward of £lOO was afterwards offered for the
discovery of the parties, £5O by the Earl of Balcarres, and
£5O by Mr. Woodcock. The prisoner Latham was sub-
sequently taken into custody, charged with being con-
cerned in the robbery, and on being apprehended he told
the police-officers that the prisoner Nelson robbed the
prosecutrix, and afterwards gave the proceeds to him,
telling him to take them to Liverpool and sell them. He
did so, but did not see the Nelsons any more, having got
on the spree in Liverpool, after he had sold the watch and
the other articles to a Mr. Abraham, a watchmaker, in
Oldhall-street, in this town. On this the police went to
Mr. Abraham's, and ultimately discovered that he had
purchased the property.
Wouticvek, the prosecutrix, and several other wit-
nesses, were examined in support of the foregoing state-
ment. Amongst other witnesses, Mr. Abraham, of Old-
hall-street, was also examined, and deposed to purchasing
the watch from the prisoner Latham.
In cross-examination by Mr. Atkinson, Mrs. Wood-
cock said that when the prisoner James Nelson was first
before her, a few days after the robbery was committed,
she could not speak positively as to his identity, but she
firmly believed be was the man.
Mr. Atkinson addressed the jury for the two Nelsons in
a powerful speech, confidently contending that the evi-
dence of identity against the prisoners was altogether in-
sufficient to justify a conviction, and that in all probability
the prisoner Latham had made the confession, and involved
his (Mr. Atkinson's) clients, in order to get hold of the
reward.
_ _

His Lordship having summed up, the jury retired for
about a quarter of an hour to consider their verdict. On
their return into court they gave a verdict of acquittal in
the case of the two Nelsons, and found the prisoner
Latham guilty.
A certificate of a previous conviction having been put
in azainst the prisoner, he was sentenced to fourteen
years' transportation.

MANSLAUGHTER AT MANCHESTER.
John Cull (24) was charged with having, at Manchester,
on the 28th of February, feloniously killed and slain
George Mayne. It appeared that a quarrel took place
between the deceased and the prisoner in a public-house
in Deansgate, which ended in a fight, during which the
prisoner knocked the deceased down, from the effects of
which he died. The prisoner was found guilty, and sen-
tenced to three months' imprisonment.
The Court rose shortly after six o'clock.

NISI PRIU S COURT.—WEDNESDAY.
(Before Mr. Baron MARTIN.)

In the first case, that of Dogherty v. Barton, which
was a matter of dispute between the landlord and tenant
of the Blackfriars Hotel, in Manchester, a reference was
agreed to.

BREACH OF PROMISE CASE.
RICHARDSON V. DELEMER.—Mr. Monk and I\./r.
Wheeler, for the plaintiffs ; and Mr. Sergeant Wilkins
and Mr. Tomlinson, for the defence.
The plaintiff was Miss Katherine Richardson, the niece
of Mr. Ostler, an architect's assistant or clerk of the
works, residing at Manchester ; and the defendant a
Frenchman, named Delemer, a mechanist.
Mr. Mons said the plaintiff was the daughter of John
Richardson, who, during his lifetime, was a non-commis-
sioned officer, a serjeant- major in the Dragoon Guards, who
died when she was very young,leaving her to the care of Mr.
Ostler, who maintained and educated her. She was now
25 years of age ; and the defendant, who had a long string
of names, Charles Henri Ferdinand Desiri 4letis Delemer,
by birth a Frenchman, who had been some time in this
country, was 32 ; and, therefore, there was no discre-
pancy in that respect. In 1846, Mr. Gautier, a professor
of languages, lodged at the house of Mr. Ostler, and
when the defendant, Delemer, came to Manchester, he
brought an introduction to Gautier. He frequently dined
at the house, and subsequently became an inmate of it
on Mr. Gautier going to France. Thus an intimacy
sprung up between the parties, and Delemer expressed
his desire to marry the plaintiff. Both Mr. and Mrs.
Ostler, in the first instance, objected on account of the
difference in their language and tastes ; and it was ulti-
mately agreed that they should wait at least twelve
months. From that time Delemer became a frequent
visitor at the house, until Mr. Ostler went to Cheadle, a
short distance from Manchester. •He used to visit her
every three or four days ; and he (Mr. Monk) would read
a letter which the defendant wrote to her about this pe-
riod, when he was residing at Radcliffe. At this time he
was negotiating with Messrs. Bird, of Radcliffe, for the
sale of a machine connected with calico printing. The
letter, which bore no date, was received in March, 1849;
at which time Delemer was received at the house of Mr.
Ostler, as the future husband of his niece; and he should
in justice state, that Mr. Delemer was not then very
familiar with the English language :

" DEAR KETTY,—I have been to Birdcliffe. It is very late ;
but I have promised you to write some words this evening,
and I am glad to have promised it, for. indeed, if I had not
some very good reasons to fear in writing, I would, I thinck,
do it so often that it is possible you would be tired of my let-
ters. But if my ignorance of your langued do not permit my
to expri me all my filling for you at last I knvvou one word
whit is sufficient. Ketty, I
.love thee more than I could tell
thee, even if I could speak in my own langued ; every time
I see you, I thinck impossible to love more than I do; and
every time I leave you, I find that I do love you more still.
And how would it not be sot Do you not yourself love my
more every day. Yes, my Ketty, or at last I think so, and
it is this idea whit mak my so happy, that my heart, some
time when I thinck of you, is so full that I can scarcety
refrain in my filing. But I must finisch ; my dearest you
have my first thincking this morning; have my last good
night. I wish I could take from your pretty mouth the kiss 1
give to your likeness. Ketty, when shall we have so sweet a
moment as yesterday ! my heart is full of the remembrance ;
and yet what is the remembrance near the reality.
" Good night my love—my only hope. Good night. Sa-
turday I shall be whit thee.

"A. DELEMER.
" Kiss aunt for me, will you ? I hope she is better to-day."
This proved a strong attachment, which would be shown
throughout the evidence, until a circumstance occurred
to which he would presently advert. Mr. Monk pro-
ceeded to relate that about the time of the French revolu•
tion in 1848, the defendant became in very distressed cir-
cumstances, owing, as he stated, to the misfortunes of
his father ' • and he made the shabbiness of his appearance
an excuse for not visiting at Mr. Ostler's as usual. After
this, however, Delemer went to live with them for a short
time, and remained about six months, without being
called upon to pay for either board, lodging, or washing.
He left upon being reminded by Mr. Ostler that his visit
had been somewhat too long, and in the autumn of that

year the plaintiff became pregnant. The defendant was
urged to marry her, and promised to do so, but subse- •
quently became the husband of a Miss Mather, leaving
her, who had for many years been his affianced bride, 8
degraded woman. The defendant did not deny the pro-
mise, but pleaded that he had been exonerated and re-
leased from it. Having warned the jury that they should
not take into consideration in this action, anything for
the maintenance of the child, for whom the defendant,
it appeared, had made some provision, Mr. Monk stated,
as regarded the position of the defendant, that he was
In
possession of £2OO a year from the sale of a patent right
to Messrs. Bird, beyond anything which he made by Ina
own business. He was, therefore, in a position to nsal7;
tain a wife in a condition of respectability, and it would
be for the jury to sey what damage the plaintiff had sill
tained. She had been for months in a declining state e
health, and had not recovered since. They must look eita.
her as she was compared with what she is, and then seY
what would be fair and reasonable damages.
Mrs. Anne Ostler, wife of Mr. Thos. Ostler, joiner and
builder, of Manchester, said that the plaintiff, Katherine
Richardson, was her husband's niece by a former marriage!
and had lived with him from seven years of age. She Oa
. now 25 years of age. In 1845, they lived at Hardwiek,i
Manchester, and had a Mr. Gautier living with therms?"
the defendant, Mr. Delemer, a Frenchman, came to visit
Mr. Gautier. In March, 1847, Mr. Delemer becansess!
j boarder at their house, on the request of Mr. Gautier. rv's
took all his meals with the family, which consisted of her
husband, herself, niece, and Mr. Gautier. In Mae,
she observed something particular in his attentions to Au%
Richardson, and spoke to him about it, and told him it wag
notconvenient for him to come into the kitchen and private
sitting-room except at meal times. In June, of that Yen!:
Mr. Gautier left for France, and Mr. Delemer remained
with them, having still a private sitting room of his Own'
In June, Mr. Delemer used to follow her niece about
under pretence of learning the English language. 9.1
being spoken to about it, he was evasive at first. At tali
time she sent her niece to Didsbury for a fortnight, an
e's
whilst she was away, one morning he said to her, " ge's
you any commands for Miss Kate, madam ?" Witncss
asked what he meant ; and he said, " I think of going ,!'s
far es Didsbury, to inquire after her health." She al
not remonstrate, hut said he was to give her love, an
say she should be glad to see Miss Richardson on Saturdei
at home. He returned in the evening, with a bougetet
flowers, which he said Miss Kate had sent, and said OP
The Kate would come home on Saturday, which she did.
defendant appeared very much delighted to see her, en
followed her about the house. Witness mentioned, the
matter to her husband on the Saturday. In July, the
defendant knocked at the door of her room, and when if
came in he bowed to her. She asked him to take a see':
He said, " I love Miss Kate—will you permit me t"
marry her ?" She said, " Mr. Delemer, you have take°,
me by surprise; T cannot give you an answer with n'
speaking to my husband on the subject." He said, "
you object, madam ?" and she replied, " No, but I altis,
name it to my husband before I can say anything fertile!'
your tastes and pursuits are different." She asked I;na
if he had spoken to her niece. He said, " I hale:
madam ; she has referred me to you." Her niece eras
e'
out at the time, but came in shortly afterwards, t'„
defendant being still in the room ; and when she came e:'
lie took her by the bend, and said, " I have named tblg
subject to madam." Miss Richardson did not say sic
thing, but smiled and looked agreeable; she did no
object at all events. Prior to this she had said to defendae`',
" probably you expect we can give my niece something;
her marriage ; we shall not during, our lifetime." Jl-;
replied, "Oh, I only want Miss Kate; I shall be in a P°s'i
tion to maintain her." Her husband was out at Cheadle!'
the time, and when he returned, Mr. Delemer met hiraln
the lobby, and threw hisarms round him,and embraced
Her husband was much surprised at the extra cordial',"
of the salutation and asked what he meant, and s'6!cei
explained what had passed, and Mr. Delemer was cad
in and said he hoped Mr. Ostler was agreeable. tie
We
husband said, " you are a stranger and a foreigner. I
know very little about you or your circumstances. s
should like you not to marry before the end of Niel.:months." Mr. Delemer said " why not now ?" )19
husband asked " are you in circumstances to marry nog's
He said not at present, till he had received remittance),
from his father, and that he expected to receive me n%
from Messrs. Bird for a patent, but her husband stirs
adhered to the twelve months, seeing that their manner
and pursuits were different. In September they went te
live at Cheadle; shortly before which the defendant Run
to lodge elsewhere, but was in the habit of cominge '''s
their house. He also visited them at Cheadle during tt'
time they were there—a year and ten months. The
defendant came sometimes twice a week whilst in Mon'
chester, and never stopped away longer than a fortnight,
After the French revolution, in 1848, the defendant's e".
cumstances apparently became worse. He had gone to
live at Radcliffe in November or December, 1847, wile„
Messrs. Bird's works are. He told them about the neg,".;
tiations which were going on about the disposal of t'
patent. In December, 1848, she went over to see hiniti
and invited him to spend Christmas day with them, an
he said, " I cannot, lam ashamed to go out." She 5,80
to him, " you have written a letter to Kate, which "b
almost broken her heart ; why have you written in
ssue),
a desponding manner ?" He made answer, " Oh. teno
her to hate me." She said, " what do you mean ?"0
he replied, " 1 have done nothing but bring trouble tIP?i,
all who have ever loved me or have ever shown me an:
kindness. I have not had courage to give her up hefoT
but I ought to have done so." Witness said, " this in
not the time for her to give you up when you Breuer.
trouble." On parting, he said, " Tell Kitty I love "
more than ever." In consequence of this, represen:o,
t'
tions were made to defendant's friends, and his sist e
came over in the following January. Defendant sP,e7„.
Christmas eve with them, but returned the same o"'s
sa,
In March his circumstances appeared to have inseeeve-,0
and he said he was in the wine trade. In August, I",r,
the defendant called rather late, and said he should be
obliged to walk home, as he was too late for the train'
She asked him why he did not remain in Manchester'"
and he said he did not do so on account of the expense,
stopping at an hotel, and witness, under the ctecn,,,o/
"i
stances, offered him a bed at her house. In Novetnue
►
1849, he stopped at their house every night for soroe•tia2fs
In May he went away for a week. She remembered ."oe
being there one evening in June, when a converse" to
arose between her husband and him about his going
id
France. He said it was uncertain, and her husband sae,
then he had better provide himself with lodgings e` to
where, which lie did in Clopton-street. He continued
ce
visit her niece till October, in which month her pied
appeared dejected, but said they were going to be merles
immediately. In consequence of what she saw, she wen
to Radcliffe on the following day, and found the defed"o,
dant at Mr. Bird's works, and he said, " How do Yo?,.ee
aunt ; how is Kitty and Mr. Ostler ?" She replied,
at
well as circumstances permit. Why do you ask ? Is 00,,
Kate in the family way, end unmarried ?" He said" Yes, but we will be married immediately." She a": 51.
" What do you call immediately ? Will you be niarrte.,
this week ?" He said, " I cannot leave the works qai
week ; I will come on Saturday evening, and speak with
Mr. Ostler." He failed to do so, and, in consequence,
Mr. Ostler went over to Radcliffe the following wetrict:
I and the defendant returned with him in the evening. I.`"
sat by the side of Miss Richardson on the sofa, and car'
ressed her, and said, " Can you tell me what time it
I must return soon, or I shall be too late for the trainee
Her husband thereupon said, " We must speak on t`iii
subject you came about ; I want to know when y woe
marry Kate ; it is a most unfortunate thing, and %,
sooner that takes place the better." Mr. Delemer re
plied, " I cannot say jest now ; it may be one month ;
os"
may be three or more." Her husband said, " What aso
I to understand by that ; do you refuse to marry her • 5
He said, " No, Mr. Ostler, I will marry her as soon to
possible." Mr. Ostler said, " What is your objection a
marry her now ? Is it want of money ; if it is I will let
it you, and I will keep her and her child until you are I-0
circumstances to do so ;" but the defendant made !:13
answer. and Mr. Ostler urged him to reply, and he Salto'
" I cannot marry her now." Mr. Ostler pressed lihn s;
assign his reason, but he didn't speak, and her busben,
said, " Are you going to prove a villain, seduce my niel
and thrust her a degraded, woman upon the world ?
It°
have made you the fairest offer that one man can we
another ; am I to understand, after all my kindness tr
ie wards you, when you had not where to go to, that you at
going to prove yourself a villain ?" Mr. Delemer saiti;
" Oh, I had my lodgings at Radcliffe." Afterwards
folded cis arms, and said, in a very insulting manner;
" I will tell you what T think of you ; you are both win
in fault than myself." Her husband raised the pei‘e'i
and ordered him to leave the room instantly, and no
enter his doors again until he came to marry Miss Rice,
ardson. Mr. Delemer left the room and went to be'
niece in the kitchen. She followed him and heard bi"e,'s
, say, " Go with me, Kitty, go with use, Kitty ; thou art
my wife, thou knows thou art." She said, " Kate, are
you married or not, tell me, and end this miserable sus-
pense." Kate answered, " No, aunt, no ;" and Mr'
Delemer said, " Do you suppose that I attach any in?:
portance to that ridiculous ceremony that was only made
to put money into priest's pockets., ' She said, " I fear
not, but we attach much importance to that. He naps
pressed Kate to go, and she (witness) said " she shall not
leave this house but as your wife ; why don't you marrir
her ?" He said, " I have repeatedly told you 1 will.
Her niece afterwards went to Louth, in Lincolnshire,
where she was confined, and came back to them at the
end of January, 1851, and for some time after her retail
she was ill with a bad cough, pain in her side, and genera
debility. The defendant, when he visited them, did net
pay pay for his board. He had not visited them since Mis'
Richardson returned from Lincolnshire.
Cross. examined.—Miss Richardson was with her Ma
er
band before their marriage. She went to school till she
was thirteen years of age. She was boarded at Lynn, re.
Cheshire, before they were married. At the time t";
defendant, Mr. Delemer, was lodging at their house the'
kept no servant, but had a charwoman, and an old en%
to clean knives and shoes. Herself and niece did tet
ordinary household work. She sometimes made the bee'
and waited at table. Her niece waited at table more
frequently than she did. Her niece prepared breakfest
the morning. They had kept a grocer's shop since tl,'„
birth of the child, and her niece's name was over Vie,
door. She assisted her niece to mind the shop. gle
husband was clerk of the works to Mr. Radcliff, who 1,0,"
sided at Oldham. Mr. Gautier paid 10s. a week to'
lodgings-245. for board and lodging ; and Mr. Delo:oes,;
paid the same. Mr. Ostler was here (in court). Befl,
their marriage she never had any differences with
Ostler about the child (Miss Richardson). She never
suggested that Miss Richardson should teach Mr. Delei
mer English ; on the contrary, she objected, and said thne
she would give him instruction herself when she had tb.
opportunity. She did not remember, on one occasinaj
after dinner, saying to the guests, " I think we Pee
better leave the young people together." She did °°d
remember suggesting anything to that effect. She ha
spoken of Mr. Delemer as the intended husband of he,
niece, but did not remember formally introducing Ilion
such. She had seen Mr. Delemer give her niece a k"-a
she turned her back, and left them in the room, but nge
for any length of time. Mr. Delemer did not say ens .tbe
occasion when Mr. Ostler lifted the poker to him, thaLeeses
should not have left them so much together. At they la
she went into the room and caught Mr. Delemer kia'ca
her niece, she did not say it was impossible to keeP suer
a character in her house. She did not see him kiss be
before the promise of marriage. He kissed her wheabey
came in and when he went out, and that was titer
~0
went to Cheadle. He never told her that he slushy
danger of being thrown so unreservedly into the el to
Pl' her niece. She first discovered the pregnancY 0'