Mr. Fauntleroy.
The Times, 1824-10-08T00:00:00

We publisti the following aceount, wvhich appears to be written by some-familiar friend of Mr. Fattntleroy. Our own,aceount did not pretend to be exact: we undertook merely to give a condeiised narrative of' the various rni mours afloat. If Mr. Fantleroy was the sober geritle- man wlhich the anniexed article makes him, he must have committed forgery as an amusement rather than as the means of supporting- his extravagancies: but we are not anxious to solve the problem, whether he is a greatrr fool or k]nave:- LFrom the Rrigh on Gazette.1 An article which recently appeared in Pie Tintes, and was copied into all the London papers, relative-to Mlr. Fauntleroy, containing a ot,g detail of alleged acts of profligacy, struck us at the *ime as bearing evident Imiarks of eitaggeration; and for that reason we de. clined copying it into our columns. ;We have since made inquihles on the-subjeci, and are now cnrbled poaitivelY to contradicttnany of the statements; and knowing the accuracy of thcsour6e from which we derive oar informatien, we shall pledge ourselveR for ibe truth of what we state. It is genierally. believed that Mr. Fauntleroy has been a victim to, among other things, the vice of gamblingf this is as groundless as the runnour which zwe lately contrailicted of his having been) involved in difflculties by 'buildint specula,ions in Brighston. Billiatrds was ahtnost the only game thsat he was in the htabit of playing, and at this he never halzar.eds more than a shilling; nor at his own table would he suffler others to do so, it being with him a pride to say that a larger sum was never lost in hi house. At whist he also occasiotially played, but he was seldon known to ca. ceed crown, and never guinea points; nor can we learn thatis wtS in the habit of playing at -any other szame. Much has been said of Mr. Fattutleroy's intimacy with hAlr. Bertram, elio. " at othtr Bang" (who, by rlie by, is a Brighton womaan, and well known here by the name cf Kent). We know that he has not seen her for a period of several years. The Timr ia states tsat Mr. Fsuntlerov frequently visited the Continent, and spoke fluently several foreigit On the contrary, he was never out of England So more 2 hors, and spoke no living language but his ewn. Wbat is said of his intimtate acquaintance vith b-anking business is per fectly Correct. lis wife (from whom it is, we believe, also true that he separated on quittiPsz the churclh after -he nuptial ceremony) has resided at TuDbridge \Wells, occasionally v isiting Brighton and other watering-places, but never goiie to London. The establishment of hir. Faun tieroy in Surrey was bhr no meatcs on so extensive a scale as lhas bean represented, the house being really a smnall one; nor is it trute that lie %tad any establisbnenT at the west eiid of the towvn, as has beera stated, i:r indeed any tbhr place eacepe Brighton; the one referred to wsft in the subtrbs of London, in the neighbourhoort of l,a:nbeht or Vauxihall, sndsi lit- tie was is known, that the peacc offlcets hael considerable difficaltv in finding iir. iss also untrue that the fenmale who resided there vas brought bv Zir. Fauntleroy to this country from VPans: althouzzh sbe was educated in Frintce. she is an Englisbwoman, and her name wvas Aliss F"?, buE she afterwards assumned the natmie of Sgrs. F . She occasionally visited Brighton, btLt when she lii so, she occupied a separate house or lodgings. It has been reported that Air. Fauntleroy was in the habit of bringing females of a certain description to his residence bere. This is not the case, nor is it, we believe, true that Mrs. a lady well known in Brighton, anid who is now liring here in great style, was formerlY under his protection, alhough he .was acquainted with her. Mr. Faunaleroy, when at Brighton, lived n avery quiet way,as welearn from thosew*hotravedined with hin, his dinners being as remarkable fbr their plainness ashis vwines reTC for their excellence ; he kept no pla-e in the house. btinging it with him from London ; and hiis ctablishment consisted only of a gar- dener, and, we believe, two female servants. In addition to what has been said abave. we can also positivelv state that MIr. Fauntlerov never entered a varbling-hou,se in hUs life. Such is the infermation we bave collected from peculiar and pri- vate sources; and thc result only serves to involve tlre case in still greater miystery thati bef.lre. If MNIr. Fauntlerov hias 1o4 ganrbled, Whtat has become of the larce ruris of money expended by him ? We confess ourselves unable tI answer the question, especially as nothing has transpired wh.ch can induce Unto believe he ever specu: lated or possessed anv property in the foreign funds. A gentleman residing in this towni married a cousin of Mr. Faurit.- leroy. MIR. FAUATTLEROy.