+ ~ -
Please report pronunciation problems here. Select and sample other voices. Options Pause Play
Report an Error

had been a servant boy to her father some time ago, but
was discharged for his coarse attentions to the little girl.
The pair eloped together, and were arrested some days
afterwards as they were preparing to start by train from
Maryborough for Cork. Nolan most indignantly
protested against the infringement on the liberty of the
subject. The little girl wept bitterly, told where she
was from, and on her person being examined £75 was
found in her possession. She would give no account of
the other £30, but it is supposed to have been given by
her seducer to his mother, who was also arrested. The
case was investigated at Maryborough before the
magistrates, and the prisoners were fully committed to take
their trial at the Wicklow Assizes. It has since been
ascertained that Miss Metcalf was for some time back
watching for an opportunity for the purpose of obtaining
funds to take herself and Nolan to America. She heard
her father say he had two hundred pounds in the box,
which he would lodge in the bank during the week.
After returning from prayers she got the key of the box
to put a fancy bonnet which she had in it, and she merely
shut the box without locking it, returning the key to
her father. When she could do so unperceived, she
took out the money and joined Nolan, who was
lurking in a garden near the house. They proceeded to
Dunlavin to the cabin of his mother, to whom the money
was given in charge in the first instance. The old
woman having watched about for some time, escorted
them a part of the way, and the wretched little girl
was going through the country on foot, amidst most
inclement weather, for two days and nights, when she
was arrested with her seducer.

At the Middlesex sessions on the 16th, a boy named
Dunkley, stated to be 13 years of age, but looking
several years younger, pleaded guilty of having Stolen
two pairs of corduroy trousers, value 5s., the property
of Thomas Dunkley, his father. The father was desired
to give some information as to the reasons for which he
prosecuted his son. He said the prisoner, though so
very young, was a very bad boy, and had repeatedly
robbed him before. Witness was a wine cooper, earning
25s. per week, and he had four children to support;
his wife was dead, and the house was kept by his
daughter, a little older than the prisoner. The lad had
been in St. Martin's School, and the parochial school,
from both of which he had been expelled for his bad
conduct. He associated with bad companions, and had
been turned away from several places where he had
been as errand boy. The Assistant Judge in passing
sentence made some important remarks. He said this
was one of those cases in which the question arose, why
were not the parents of such boys liable to be called upon
to pay all or part of their maintenance in prison? Why
should the father of this boy be released from all charge
for his child because that child had been a very bad and
wicked one? The father was in the receipt of 25s. a
week, and he ought to be compelled to support his
wicked child just the same as he would have to support
him if he was an idiot, but there was no power to
compel him to do so. A great movement was now in
progress on the question of juvenile delinquents and
their reformation, and the object would have been
accomplished years ago had it not been for Sir John
Pakington's Act, which took away all such cases as the
present from courts where they were tried by jury and
placed them under a summary jurisdiction. By this
they were withdrawn from the public eye, and those
who sought a better system were thrown back for years.
Formerly, when these boys were sent for trial in that
court in numbers, juries cried out with indignation at
what they saw, the whole feelings of the country were
outraged, but now the cases were summarily disposed
of, and though they did not come before the public,
the evil still existed. The sentence on the prisoner was,
that he be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for two
years, but it must not be understood that that sentence
would be carried out as passed. The prisoner would
be sent to an institution, but he could only be got there
by the round-about mode of having this sentence passed
upon him.

A young girl named Sarah Osborne, was brought
before the Marlborough Street Police Court, on the 16th,
charged with having attempted to commit Suicide by
drowning herself in the Serpentine. A police-constable
stated that he was on duty near the Serpentine, when
he saw the defendant throw herself into the river with
the intention of drowning herself. He rushed in after
her, and with some difficulty contrived to get her ashore.
After she was somewhat restored, he asked her what she
meant by doing that, when she replied, she was tired of
her miserable existence, and intended to make away
with herself. He then took her to the workhouse. The
prisoner in tears said, she was an unfortunate girl, and
had walked the streets for the last three years; and
feeling disgusted with such a mode of existence, she had
come to the determination of putting a period to her
miseries by drowning herself. She was now on reflection
sorry for having attempted such a wicked act. The
magistrate said, as she had expressed a wish to leave
her wretched mode of life he would send her to the
workhouse for a short time, and in the meanwhile he
would consider what could be done for her future

A case of Appalling Destitution was brought before
the Thames police court on the 17th. Mr. Pemble, the
beadle and inspector of nuisances in the hamlet of
Ratcliffe, stated that he had been sent for to a small
tenement, in St. James's-place, Ratcliffe. In one corner of
a small room was the emaciated body of a poor woman,
who appeared to have died of cold and starvation. It
was lying on a heap of short and dirty straw, which had
very much the appearance of chaff, and it was covered
with the remains of an old and ragged quilt. There
was no furniture, provisions, or fuel of any kind in the
place. The husband of the woman, a fruit vendor,
named John Ellis, who was almost broken-hearted, was
in the room, and said that he and his wife had been
reduced to great distress, and he was unable to obtain
food for them; that he laid down by the side of his wife
on the floor on the previous night, and when he awoke
in the morning he found she was cold and motionless.
He called in a neighbour and found that the poor woman
was dead. Pemble added that he had seen hundreds of
cases of destitution which had affected him very much,
but never saw such a dreadful one as this before. The
husband of the deceased was an industrious man, but a
series of misfortunes, the high price of provisions, and
his inability to purchase fruit, had brought him to a
state of utter destitution, and his wife had perished for
want of common necessaries. The magistrate said he
was surprised and pained that such a deplorable event
had taken place. If the case of the poor man and his
wife had been made known to him before he would have
rendered every assistance. The poor man was brought into
court, and was recognised by many present as an
industrious, civil, and well-conducted vendor of fruit, well
known in the neighbourhood of Stepney. He confirmed
all that the humane beadle of the hamlet had stated,
and said he had been turned out of a room he occupied
in Brooke street, Ratcliffe, because he could not pay his
rent. He had applied to one of the relieving officers of
the Stepney union in which Ratcliffe was situate, and
the parish doctor had seen his invalid wife, but all they
obtained was a loaf of bread and some oatmeal, with an
order to go into the workhouse, which he declined doing,
because he did not wish to be separated from his wife.
The magistrate expressed his astonishment that relief
had been doled out on so small a scale to the destitute
people, and he thought in a case like this meat and other
nourishments should have been supplied. There was
neglect, he was afraid, on the part of some one; it was
very painful indeed to hear of such a case as this. He
felt surprised the doctor had not recommended some
nourishments for the man and his wife while they were
in such a deplorable state, more particularly as the same
doctor had recommended several cases of distress to him
by letter and he had attended to them. Ellis said the
doctor had not been near his starving wife for three
weeks. The magistrate asked the poor man whether it
would not be better for him to go into the workhouse in
the state he was in? Ellis said he did not wish to go
into the workhouse. He could not bear the thought of
it. If he could only struggle on and obtain a few
shillings to purchase a pair of shoes and some fruit to
raise a few pence he should be satisfied. The magistrate
ordered the man a sovereign from the poor-box and told