TRIAL OF MADAME RACHEL.

Southland Times, Issue 1062, 25 November 1868, Page 2

TRIAL OF MADAME RACHEL.

At the Central Criminal Court, on the 21st August, Sarah f&achel Leverson, better known as Madame Kachel, was placed at the bar } charged with obtaining money from Mrs Borrodaile by false pretences, and also with conspiracy to defraud Mrs Borrodaile of £1000. The prisoner pleaded " not guilty." She was accommodated with a seat. Mr Serjeant Ballantine opened the case for the prosecution, and called Mrs Mary Tucker Borrodaile, who, having been sworn, said : " I first became acquainted with Madame Eachel in 1864. I visited her at her premises in New Bond-street. She at that time merely gave me some powder arid soot for b'a"thsi I went to her s'hdp in May, 1866. The first time I called she asked me how much more I intended to spend with her. I told her that I originally intended to spend only £10, but, as I had already spent £170, 1 hoped she would do something for me for it. She told me to call again, and I did so. and at that time she told me that there was a gentleman in love with mci Slie told me it was Lord Banelagh. I was much surprised, and asked her where he had seen me, and she said that he had seen me befone I married Mr Borrodaile. She told me he was a very good and rich man. I saw her two or three days afterwards. I was in the small sitting-room with her, and she said, " I am now in a position to introduce you to Lord Banelagh." She opened the door, and said, ' This is Lord Ranelagh/ I said, * Are ydiir Lord Batieiagh ?' and he* said, ' Yes, here is my card.' I looked at it, and handed it back again. When we went back into the room, she said he would make me a good husband. I saw Lord Banelagh on several occassions. I saw him once to speak to after that. A few days afterwards, after taking a bath, I went into the shop when Lord Eanelagh was there, and she said, 'I must again introduce you to Lord Eanelagh.' I xorget what conversation passed. She afterwards asked me if I should like to have him for a husband." Mr Williams: What answer did you make? . Witness : Well, you know; I thought as he wag such a good rrian and such a ! rich man, it would be to my daughter's | advantage if I married him. j Examination continued : In the month of June there was some conversation | about the marriage. I was to pay £1000 i for being made beautiful. At this time I had money, in the funds. Madame Eachel introduced me to a person named Haines, She told me that he was a solicitor. I went into Madame Rachel's sitting-room with Mr Haines, and he sold £1300 stock. I did not have the money. The order waa written by Mr Haines and I signed it. It requested him to hand over £800 out of £963 to Madame Eachel. At the time I signed the receipt for the £800 I had never received any consideration for it. Madame Eachel told me that we were to be married by proxy. I asked her what she meant, and she said it was to be done by letter writing. (Laughter.) , She told me that the letters would be written in the name of " William," in case they should be left about. 1 knew at that time that Lord Eanelagh's Christian name was Thomas. The letter produced was given to me by Madame Rachel. She gave me at the time a vinaigrette and a pencil-case, which she said were sent to me by Lord Eanelagh, and that they belonged to his mother. The letters read by the learned serjeant were then put in and read. Examination continued : All the answers to these letters were written by her, but were dictated by Eachel. Eachel told her she would require a quantity of lace, and she introduced her to a Mr Bower, to whom an order was given for between £300 and £400 worth. The lace was sent to .Rachel. She (witness) never received a single inch of it. She was arrested for the amount of the bill, and had to pay it. Eventually Eachel told her that she had pawned the lace for Lord Eanelagh. She also told her it was necessary she should have diamonds, and sent for Mr Pyke, a jeweller, who brought a quantity of diamonds set as a coronet and necklace, to Eachel's house. Eaehel placed them on her head and asked her how she liked them. The price was £1200, but at that time she had not the money; but she had some property at Streatham, and Eachel took her to Mr Haines to empower her to dispose of it. The property realised £1540, £1400 of which she ordered Mr Haines to pay Eaehel. After the property had been sold, Eachel told her Lord Eanelagh would not allow her to have the diamonds from Mr Pyke, and she had to pay £100 to Mr Pyke as a forfeiture for not purchasing them. After that Eachel asked her whether she would allow her to pay the £1400 to " Captain William Edwards." She gave her consent to such being done. " Captain Edwards " was the name she knew Lord Eanelagh by. The money Sachel said had ! been paid to him for voluufceering purposes. She had, after she had given Eachel the £1400, given her additional small sums of money, always believing it was for Lord , Eanelagh. The Becorder: "Did she tell you who she wanted the money for?" Mrs Borrodaile: "Yes; it was always for Lord Eanelagh." Examination continued : Eachel told her she would require a trousseau for the

marriage, and Mr Proctor, of Brotnpton, brought what was required, for whiciiihft paid £190. She never received one singk article, and when she asked Eachel abbtfr it, ancl liow she wag to. do the thing, Rachel always told her, to itskl&aV "William for them. Eachel induced Ijjer to send for her plate from Cheltenham, and to bring it to her house, as she mid it was better that every thing should be together— (laugther)— as she was going to be married. She had also" given he* all her rings and jeWeUeryj /'Jo 1 , jfecfc'', with the other things, bri£ she haid ner«q seen them after she 1 had on<& parted with them. She had frequently asked 1 Badhel about them, but a never could get any other answer then that the was to ask Lord Banelagh for them. Bachel had said something to her about gentlemen seeing her (prosecutix) in the bath. She declined to say what it was. Mrs Hicks never said she should not have a bath at Davies-street, because she had said that she had been peeped at by a gentleman whilst so engaged. . After Eachel's treatment her skin was perhaps a little improved, but not much. (Loud laughter.) She had nothing done to her hair ; that was cut by a lady in Bond-stree^ whe had attended to it for the last sixteen years ; no one else ever touched it (Laughter,) It was all her own— (loud laugther) — and so was her contplenotu (Loud laughter j She 1 .niigtit,, hqweve*,; use a little of the " adrlculous" for 1 her* hair now and then, but nothing else. (Loud laughter.) She was not quite certain about ordering some shirts at Bogers's ; but she believed, that Bachel and Lord Eanelagh wished her to select some shirts neckties and socks for him. She now knew Lord Eanelagh was not so rich a^s Eachel.had stated. Mr D. Sfeymiou*-^ That he' *as hVrd rip* for a fifWuft?* (Laughter.) Witness —"$o i iM he was not rich." Mr D. Seymour— "And that's, the reason your ordered some shirts for him. i Some letters were here read bearing the prosecutrix's signature, in one of which she said that her brother-in-law was in search of his lordship— that he had bought a portrait of him and did not like his ugly nose. (Laughter.) And in another that he (Lord Banelagh) knew the ij overlarid route. to her heart"— (laughter)— all o£ which she LrfaStf f eft? written at the instigation of Madame;' Eachel. There had been some talk about persons peeping into the bath; one person especially had been coupled with her name. Serjeant Ballantine— " "Who wm that?" Witness: "Am I obliged to mention the name ?" Serjeant Ballantine : " Yes." Witness : " Then it was Lord BanelaghV Madame Bachel, told her that in the eyes of the Almighty, Lord Eanelagh was her husband, as nehad seen her more than a dozen times in her bath. The coiirt then adjoiirnetL The trial was resumed next day, and the evidence for the prosecution Was proceeded with* Lord Eanelagh. . was called. He-*axjL "My name is Thomas Heron Jones. I am known as Viscount Eanelagh. I have been at Madame Eachei's sh^ btft I certainly never promised marriage to Mrs 1 B orr odaile. I never borrowed, money of her." Serjeant Ballantine : "Did you ever ask her for money?" Lord Baneiagh: " Certainly not." Serjeant Ballantine: "Did you ever send her a letter with a coronet on the paper ?" Lord Eanelagh: "Certainly not. Ido not use paper with a coronet on it/ Crossexamined : "I am very glad to explain why I went to Madame Bachers. ,1 merely went from curiosity to see persons who had obtained a large sum of money from a lady some time before, and which was the subject of an action. I certainly did not go to be enamelled. (Laughter.) I afterwards purchased some small article of china." Mr Digby Seymour i "Did you ever' hand her your card? Lord Eanelagh : Certainly not. I did see her once in the shop, but I had no communication whatever with her, and I certainly did not give her my card." Mr Digby Seymour : " Did you receive any letter from her?" Lord Eanelagh: " Mrs Borrodaile made , % claim upon me in November, 1867, and I immediately communicated with my solicitor. I had never received any letter previously from Mrs Borrodaile. I received several letters afterwards, and I produced all that I have." Be-examined : " I am quite sure I never handed a card to Mrs Borrodaile. I have never seen Madame Eachel or her daughters or anyone connected with her at any other place but her own shop. I say ting emphatically." Mrs Borrodaile was recalled. Several letters shown she admitted were written by her. A letter to Lord Eanelagh called him ' her own dear Tom,' and said that she knew that he loved her, but he must remember that she was loved by another man, and also reminded him that he had seen her in the bath in Daviesstrest, and said she was afraid he was u a naughty old Tommy." (Laughter.) This closed the case for the prosecution. No witnesses were called for the defence. After addresses from on both sides, and summing up by the Eecorder the jury retired at six p'cloek. They again came into court at eleven, and stated that they had not agreed upon a verdict, and were not likely to do so. The Eecorder said he thought that, under the circumstances, he should be justified in discharging them Madame Bachel was remanded to Newgate. The foreman of the jury writes to the papers to say that ten were at first for finding a verdict of guilty; that subsequently the eleventh joined in that view, and that eleven was the number for guilty when they were discharged. By telegram to Galle we learn that Madame Eachel, on a second trial, was found guilty, and sentenced to five years' penal servitude.

M-S»?VT»

a

*