LADY'S HOUSE RAIDED CLEVER ROGUES EXPLOIT.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXVII, Issue 70, 24 March 1914, Page 9

LADY'S HOUSE RAIDED CLEVER ROGUES EXPLOIT.

BIQ FURNITURE SALE. (From Our Own Correspondent.) LONDON, 13th February. How a polished and plausible rogue, who called himself Captain' Dunn, obtained entry into a house at Wimbledon while the owner was holiday-making, and sold part of the furniture, was told before Mr. Justice Lush on Saturday. Mrs. Elsie Boyton, \yife of Mr. B. A. Boyton, surveyor, residing at Wargrave, Burghley-road, Wimbledon, was the plaintiff, and she claimed damages for trespass and injury to furniture against Mrs. M. A. Ward, a furniture dealer, of Wimbledon. Mrs. Ward's defence was that she had been the victim of Captain Dunn. Mr. Hawke, K.C., in opening the case for the plaintiff, said the house was elaborately furnished. On 23rd May, 1913, Mr. and Mrs. Boyton went for a holiday. Iwo maids remained to finish certain work, after which they were to leave the house and take the fiey to Mrs. Rolf, who occupied a cottage close by. During the afternoon, a clever rogue, who. described himself as Captain Henry Dunn, arrived and informed tho maids that ho had taken the house furnished, and that Mrs. Boyton would come back later in the day to settle the inventory. By somo means the "captain" had obtained the key of the house, and he telephoned to the defendant furniture dealer, asking her to go to the premises to see some furniture he wished to sell? The maids had gone by the time the defendant arrived, and "Captain Dunn " who was alone, stated to her that he had quarrelled with his wife, who was going abroad next morning, and that he wanted to sell some of the furniture. He said he did not wish to sell the pictures, plate, or 'certain pieces of furniture. Ihese reserved furniture lots, counsel explained, were locked. A LITTLE CARELESS. The defendant offered £135 to £145 lor the articles, and though counsel did not say she had been guilty of bad faith, yet she was a little careless. It was estimated that tlie sale price of the articles which defendant agreed to purchase was about £350. She gave "Captain Dunn" a crossed cheque for £50 on account. That evening a friend of the defendant, to whom she related the circumstances suggested that the furniture might belong to the "captain's" wife, and the cheque was stopped. "Captain •Dunn having discovered the stoppage ot the cheque, saw the defendant next morning, and he was paid £50 in cash. Defendants husband and an assistant had spent the night packing up the purchased furniture. The next morning Mrs. Rolfe saw what was going on, and cautioned the men not to remove anything from the house. While she went to tell the police, the van" was loaded and sent away. It was discovered, however, on the defendant's premises, and eventually defendant gave up the furniture. Counsel contended that the defendant was guilty of carelessness. PLEA FOR SYMPATHY. For the defence Mr. Matthews said his client appreciated that she was liable in law for, any damages Mrs. Boyton had sustained. The defendant was cortainly entitled to sympathy; she had been the victim of a clever rogue. When she arrived at the house " Captain Dunn " had tea prepared for her in the hall. Next morning, when he telephoned to her about the cheque she had stopped, he asked whether she was not satisfied with her transaction. She replied that she must be satisfied that, his wife agreed to the sale. At a subsequent interview ho acted his part we.ll, pretending to be greatly annoyed, and the defendant tore up the cheque, drew a fresh cheque for £50, which the husband cashed, and the money was given to the "captain." who disappeared. Since then nothing has been heard of him. Mr. Hawke s.aid that Mrs. Boyton accepted fully the defendant's assurance that she did not receive the silver jug or plated flower vase which was missing. Mr. Justice Lush suggested a *settlement, remarking that there had been perfect good faith on both sides. A consultation between tho Judge and counsel followed in the Judge's private room. It was- afterwards announced that there should be judgment for Mi's. Boyton for an inclusive sum, and the Judge remarked that Mrs. Boyton had beJbaved very reasonably.