MISTAKEN IDENTITY. THE WOLVERHAMPTON SLANDER CASE. (FROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT.) London, March 22.

Te Aroha News, Volume VI, Issue 372, 29 May 1889, Page 4

MISTAKEN IDENTITY. THE WOLVERHAMPTON SLANDER CASE. (FROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT.) London, March 22.

An fiction for damages for slandor and false imprisonment of an interesting 1 and most unusual chat acler has beon tried at Stafford this week, befoie the Lord Chief Justice of England and a special jury. The case was in one respect similar to several which have arisen lately, in thai it turned on a question of mistaken identitj'. Strong likenesses between individuals, but more especially between women, are clearly far commoner than we imagine, and to swear to a person's identity, unless one knows him or her thoroughly woll, is by no means altogether safe or advisable. The story ol the Wolvorhampfcon slander case, bereft of detail by the " Daily News," runs thus : "Some time ago Mr Mills, a provision dealer of Wolvorhampton, prosocuted a lady named Alice Scoflham on i a chargo of fraud. This lady, with her elder sister, Miss Eliza Scoilham, kept a well-known high school for ghls at YVolverhampton, and, almost ad a mattci ot course, both sistei\3 wore highly respected. Mr Mills had undoubtedly beon defrauded by someone. A young woman unknown had called at his house with a note purporting to come ftom his miriicd daughter, and asking for a tomporaty loan of £43. ■ . He unhesitatingly sent a cheque by the bearer of the noto, and it was cashed ; but his daughter doclaicd that the proceeds had not roach cd her, and that she had not wiilbcn tho letter. The letter, in fact, was a forgery. Mr Mills then naturally tried to find out who luid robbed him, and his suspicions fell on the ScofThams, for no better reason than that his sei van t. said that bho thought tho young womanwho brought tho letter resembled oio of those ladie\ He at once had their house watched, and himself called there on somo clumsy pretext of making an inquiry about terms for the admission of boarders. Ho saw Miss Eliza Scotlham. the other sister was ill, and the unsuspecting lady agreed to call at his hou 4 e on the following day with further particulars. At the house she found tho clerk who had cashed the cheque, with several other persons. The clerk shook his head as soon as Miss Scoflham appeared, in token that he could not identity her, yob Mr Millo was still firmly poisuaded that one of tho two sisters was tho guilty party. He had no better reason for it than tho vague evidence of his servant as to the identity of the young woman who had bi ought the letter ; or, if he wanted a better one, he thought he had found it in a repoit that the sisters had failed to complete their payments of a loan »f £5. Their povei by, in fact, was presumpthe e\idenco of their crime. " When Miss Scoff ham heard the charge sheshowed great agitation, and she foolishly said that rather than have such an accusation made public she would herself repay the £-A3. Mr Mills, who always jumped to conclusions, cho?o to construe this into a confession of her sister's guilb, and after locking up the lady for somo two hours in his oihee, he at once proceeded to obtain a warrant for the sister's aircst. The chargo was heard before tho magistrates?, and Mas of couise dismissed, but Mr Mills made no apology, and from fhst to last fought his case with all the obstinacy of a dull man. By this time the sisters had grown tired of acting on the defensive, and they commenced a spirited attack by suing their persecutor for damages — the one for malicious prosecution, the other for slander and false imprisonment, each claiming £1,000. Loid Coleridge, after a patient hearing, extending over several days, gave them Cl,OOO between them, with costs — £750 to Miss Alice Scoff ham, who had been arrested and sent to prison, and the remainder to her elder sister, who had been detained in Mr Mills's house. All that Mr Mills had to say in excuse was bhat his impression as to Miss Eliza Scoftham's confession ot her sister's guilt was confirmed by se\eral p-ison3 who Avere present on the occasion. But these persons were not in the room during his. interview with the distracted lady, and, as the Judge remarked, all the circumstances under which the meeting: took place made their evidence of the slightest possible \aluo. In the end, Mr Mills made an apology of a kind, and tho complete bieakdown of his def<nce in the action brought by one of the sisters was taken as decishe of thoother case, to the great ea\ing of tho public lime. Lord Coleridge was patticulaily seveie on bhe defendant's wronghcadcdne?& and hia want of all reasonable piecaution against an infirmity of judgment which he ought to have long since lcanv d to suspect. Mr Mills took care to ha^vc it known that he was a subscriber to the Society for tho Prevention of Ciuelty to Atiima'p. As Loid Coleridge remarked, this could not he taken as an olfset again&t his cruelty to two defcncelc-.s women. Tho whole Cc.se tends to show that the man who is his own detective olh'ccr mny have a fool for a client, no less than the man who is his own lawyer."