EXTRAORDINARY CHARGES OF ROBBERY.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2584, 19 April 1877, Page 3

EXTRAORDINARY CHARGES OF ROBBERY.

At the Worship street. Police Court, Liverpool, Frederick William -JVnnir.ns, 25, was brought up on vonvu.d, chared with having stolen a g< l.i v iviyji' the property of Louisa Collins. Tli>' y« os'icutrix, a well-dressed girl of al>oul 20, rmide-the acquaintance pt'the prisonpr in I lie street, accepted his escort home. HJ.lov^nrV him in call on many subsequent '^tsi'MMons, and walked out with him, although, as sho said, not aware that there was any " sweet-hearting " about it. On .one occasion, when bidding her good night at the street door, he took her wa'eh "as if in fun," and although she repeatedly tried to get it back, he put her off flour time to time until about throe weeks, had passed, and then sho found that it had been pawnfd. The prosecutrix gave her evidence in a straightforward and selfcontained manner, and now on the case being called on, said that slie wished to withdraw from the prosecution. The mother of the prisoner had written to her asking her to withdraw. Mr Hannay, having been informed by the gaoler that there were other charges agaiusfc tlie,prisoner, said that, taking the circumstances into consideration, he could not allow her to withdraw. Prisoner then said he wished to cross examine the prosecutrix, and he did so, reading his questions' from a written paper. In reply, the prosecutrix admitted having told a Miss Major that she had given the prisoner her watch to have a glass put in it. That, however, she said, was a " lie," and she told it to " cover " him (tlie prisoner). She had told a "thousand.lies "to screen the prisoner. t>he also admitted having said that if she prosecuted; it would be " for revenge." That was for the falsehoods he had told her. He had" told her his mother was dead, but since sho (prosecutrix) had charged the prisoner,'the mother had written appealing letter, to her, and she bad promised to get the prisoner off, but was '.' afraid it ,did : not lay in he* power." The watch, having, been produced in Court, and identified by Ihe, prosecutrix, prisoner, who said he. should call a witness, was ordered to be committed for trial in this case.. A second charge of a similar character was then gone into. ■ The prosecutrix was Emily Elmsden, the daughter of a tin-plate worl-er. She -said that having made the prisoner's acquaintance, he represenfing his father as a gentleman, she, " kept company" with him. On the 25th September last they were bidding "good-bye" at the street'door, and he took 16s 6d out of her pocket as if "in fun." He had taken several small things from her in lhe same way before, and had tried to get her watch, but she had always prevented him. When he took the 16s 6d she asked him for it back, and he laughed and said she was afraid to trust him. She let him go until the next night, when they met, and then he said he had forgotten it. 'Afterwardshe made re■peated excuses—one, as in the last case, that he had had his pocket-book stolen from him. She saw him four or five times between the 25th and 29th September, but after the 29fch he never came agaiu. Mr Hannay asked her how she came to know that the prisoner was in custody. Prosecutrix replied that she read it in the papers, and came forward in- justice, to others. She had no doubt that soon after the, prisoner left her he made the acquaintance of the other young woman, arid made the same offer to her. Mr Hannay remarked that in this case the prosecutrix seemed to have treated the matter as a debt, and there might be some trouble about it. He remanded the -case for another week.—Exchange. „". „,. '