Blandford, Wimborne and Poole Telegram. — 1878-07-19 (Blandford, Dorset, England)

ELLEN 'BEWLEY." He sent no money, hut receiving another of like character, he consulted his solicitor, Mr. Soames. Afterwards he received another communication which was the Subject of the present charge. It was posted at Alton, and ran thus—" Mr. Edgeler,—l now write to let you know that I am at the Aitori Union, and they are going to make me go before the Board and tell the father of my child, and of course I shall tell them who it is. so that you will have a letter front them this week if you don't send to own it, and soon as I am well enough they will have me up, and make me swear it, and I shall tell everything, after telling such lies as you have told me, that you would keep rue and thin child too, and nice you have done it. But please goodness you shall keep what beongs to you. If you don't keep what you promised, of course I shall say the troth. You ought to be asharnad for it to come to law. You tell me it is no good to make a fuss about it, hut if you don't send to me you shall he shown up a! ter such lies. The poorest chap out w nil have acted better than you have done to me. hut of course they will ask y. u what you gave me the sovereign for. Look at the lies you will have to tell, hut I shall soy all wiih a clear conscience, and that is more than you can if you deny it. I know exactly when it is, and shall say why it was given, If you are not ashamed ti go to law I am sire I shall not be. You can have the chance of sending to me, aid that is more than you ought to have, when you wanted to blame it on somebody else: but God will judge. And even if you get out of it, father says he will hang for you, but his life is worth a million of yours. If son only act as you ought to, it void.] ha a great deal better on both sides, so no More.—ELLEN BEAGLEY " On the 26. h, he was served with a summons in twin ariv, but no der Was made upon him, as there was no cfrrohorative !woof. Mrs. hdgeler, Mr. Walter, assistant Sidney Bartley, Mrs. Ann Page, Dr. Leachtnan, and P. Supt. Walter were examined, and counsel on both sides addressed thq jury  with a zeal and warmth which drew an observation from his Lordship that though e had perhaps when younger offended in like manner himself, he rather preferred to see a triad conducted now in a judicial than an advocate's way; and having himself gone through and commented upon the evidence very carefully, he laid it down as a dictum that such a mode of attempting to get redress, even where the allegation were true, except upon reasonable and proper cause of which he, and not the jury, would have to decide, was a contravention of the law. He should ask the jury to say, first, was prisoner the writer of these lettee- I And then, if she was, did they believe that 11tr. Edgeler was the father of her child? . .  _ . Counsel for the prosecution said he thought somebody el.e ought to have been in the dock with her. A young girl of 17 or 19 could hardly have been the concoctor of the letters, though she wrote them. The itiry found her guilty—that she was the writer, and that Mr. Edgeler was not the father of her child. . _  His Lordship said that she had been convicted of a very serious accusation against a married man of good reputation. Robbery or murder though serious crimes, were scarcely worse than this, where the peace of whole families may be destroyed. and their reputation lost for ever. He sentenced to five years' penal servitude.