The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1864-11-29
4 Curious Bogus nnby Casc In England.

Tho English plpers contain details Of n three
dsys' trial in the R5ll, Court London, which sx.
citei extraordinary Interest, from the Singular
revelations respecting T. ase AZ life that hal hith-
erto been regarded ex.lusvoly belonging to the
domains OF fiction. Iu many respects Il resembles
the celebrated Blrdcll cunningham case IN New
York Th. action was brought ty Miss Gedncy,
a2ci ten years, TO recDvor property 10 which Sic
claimed H. be entitled, ns the only child Of Mr.. aud
Mrs Gednev, of Csndlebury III, l. ncOlnshire.
The defcni iants. Who claimed 10 lie the real heirs,
charged that the plaintiff was only suppo~itious
I'D From the evidence II aplthIs mat MI And
Mrs. Geiney were married IN lsol, but hsi no
q llrcn for several years. Several rniScarEiAxes
had occurred, and the parties arc represented 70
have lived very unhapply to0cther In tho
latter part u 1858, Ars. Godney told her
husi and and friends that al. was eneiehte,
and I'm Eel lruary, 1S,l, she went " London alOuo
To consult u. ys clan. within few DAYS after
her departure her husband received n letter an
nouncinR her sudden delivery OF q female child.
He al once hurried up " town. aud Not iitin; tic
| ph ysiciau, q Mr.. GJss who ATTENDED her, he dis
! charged him, CALM ~ another medical Htteud.
! snt-Dr. farvc VIII, tosi!fed ON the trial That .
| had o Ica son To doubt that she hal been actually
confined. At any rate he treated her Ia ev1ry re-
srect as n abe had been delivered uf a child within
| A couple Of dGya TIE np.hcr on her recovery WIZ
| publicly churched; her brother sto"' sponsor Tor
the child, and the father had ~ suspicion q any
thing wrong for wears after, aud unhl lie bad boon
| informed by other parties. IL 1851 Mrs u. In.y
died aud Up 10 t.at uuie the Iiautih was always
treated as tLe!r chii On the very day of her
funeral however Nj. Gcduey rcce vet a letter from
Mr. smith-Mrs Gelney's father stating that
the plaintiff was Not really his daughter,
but a supposit Gus child and therefore claim
Ing certain property 10 which no was emitted
ns uext beir, in case MIS- Ocdney had no issue.
The case was brought % test this clsn, IIappear-
| eI in eyideuce that Mrs. Gedney, who was weak.
mpulsive woman, adopted this means in order 10
| via back the affections " her husband ene sue
cecIed IN imposl ug the child uI,u the family, bu,
was afterwards seized with reuorso aud coniessoi
the rsud ~ ssver1l persluS about her previous tc
her death, Il is ceTsiu tnst she never manifested
any affection for the cl l refused e. earcss 1t, and
us If in disdaip VI it, mean birh refused 70 permit
1t to be clo. he'd according 10 is rapk Ihu lani
lady Of the London lodging touse "heFe ai'e Al
confined testified that sic di ro' tehe'e w We
tine that xrs. Gedney Wa really pregnant 90
said that sDou aiior the l.uy tooi ~ tne
dJctor (GDssl anu his wlIe aIrHel, tA'
Latter, with bundle under her artu. For he'erA
hours lhcrc but little nose or sur Ia the room
and 1t thu eud of that tin: tic lar1lady "si caot
In anu WAS shown iema.e lu!alt that looGel AZ {.
Il had teen born week Lipntly nurse telu
fed that she saw enough - satisfy LeT 'ls' th'
child was not newly born. young tDIuiiro(
woman. Iamed Lucy Fletcher, was produced, "h
swJre that On the sth OF February, l'o4' eoupl
OF days b fJre ArJ. Gelne : IL! o.od confinement
sae was delivered, in the York HJad Lyins-.n Hos
ptal, OF q daughter, iron WHOM she parted q ifv
us"s alter TO . geuii' nAn wb0 siid NC wsn'ed !
for iady 10 sdop'. s4e mover So" ,.e e.n'
J gwen was iuiiy identified as DR.. Go.
the physician who attended MS ueaney
THIS eyIaence, together with the coness!ohs Gi "
lady apd other sorroborst.ve te.tiIuony, precIu
VII doubt aud the Jury rotuInsd veri.et 10 "
srset taAs " bR~ gtb wao pss lsss'''0's pss-s