MARFLEET Including variants e.g. MERFLET(T); MARFLETE; MARFLIT(T); MARFLIGHT, etc. Family History


Extract from:
The Times
20th February 1833.





COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Tuesday Feb. 19

(London Sittings, before the LORD CHIEF JUSTICE and a Common Jury)

BEMAN v. MARFLEET

This was an action for money had and received, under circumstances somewhat peculiar.
Mr. Serjeant BOMPAS and Mr. FOLLETT were for the plaintiff; and Mr. Serjeant JONES and Mr. HOGGINS for the defendant.

The defendant, Mr. Marfleet, who is a grocer at Ewell in Surrey, engaged the plaintiff as shopman, but after he had been in his service for some time he suspected that he robbed the till. In order to detect him he put marked money into the till, when leaving home for the day, and missing so me of the marked money on his return, he felt convinced that the plaintiff had purloined it. He therefore consulted a solicitor as to the best course to adopt, and acting on the advice he received, he summoned the plaintiff before him in a private room, and then, in the presence of his solicitor and his clerk, he charged him with having taken the money, telling him that if he would consent to his box being opened and examined, he would forgive him. The plaintiff consented to the box being examined, but declined the defendant's offer to have his friends sent for that they might be present. Upon going up stairs to the plaintiff's room, the latter opened his box for inspection, but first stated that the money his possession consisted of 26l.10s. which he had received of a friend, together with 3l. odd which he had received for wages, 1l. he had received from his uncle, and one or two other trifling sums of minor amount. On inspecting the contents of the box, however, a bag was found, containing 70l. in sovereigns, and a quantity of silver and copper also; amongst which was some of the money that had been marked by the defendant. There were also some articles of the defendant's shop goods found in the box. The plaintiff fell upon his knees, begged the defendant's pardon, put his hands to his face, cried a great deal, and observed that persons unfortunately discovered their faults when it was too late. The defendant, in consideration of the young man's friends, who were respectable, and also in fulfilment of his promise to forgive him, took no proceedings against him, but suffered him to depart, and take with him the whole amount of the money which he had previously claimed to be his, in all about 39l. The plaintiff now sought to recover the remainder of the 70l. alleging that it had been lent to him by an old woman, who wished him to go into business with her: in support of which that person was called, and swore that she and the plaintiff had proposed opening a shop in partnership, and that, after an unsuccessful attempt to do so in Crawford-street, Oxford-street, she gave him this money when he was about proceeding to the defendant's service at Ewell, in order that he might take a shop if he found one that would answer, he giving her a promissory note for the amount, payable in 12 months after date, by way of security. Other evidence was also called, to show that the plaintiff had put the 70 sovereigns into a bag when he was going into the defendant's service at Ewell, and having put the bag into his box with his clothes, delivered it to a carrier to take down by his cart, whilst he himself performed the journey on foot. Upon the defendant, however, proving the other facts above stated, the jury disbelieved this improbable story, and returned a verdict for the defendant.

---

© Marfleet Family History 2000
	Newspaper Extract This page was last updated
This page contains links to other web-sites. If you experience problems with an onward link, please e-mail me with details so that the problem can be rectified. Thank you.

Family History Banner Exchange