As some of these establishments may be still in existence, we refrain from republishing the addresses. These specimens, as advertisements, simply call for no comment at our hands, and so we will get on with the more pronounced, though less guilty, swindlers. Here is a specimen which doubtless gave the postman some extra work:—

GENTLEMEN having a respectable circle of acquaintance may hear of means of INCREASING their INCOME without the slightest pecuniary risk, or of having (by any chance) their feelings wounded. Apply for particulars by letter, stating their position &c. to W. R. 37, W—— Street C—— Square.

To such an advertisement as this—one of exactly the same kidney—which appeared in Lloyd’s, under the head of “How to make Two pounds per Week by the outlay of Ten Shillings,” and asking for thirty stamps in return for the information, the following belongs. It is sent in reply to the letter enclosing the fee, and is too good a specimen of the humour possessed by these rogues to be passed over:—

“First purchase 1 cwt. of large-sized potatoes which may be obtained for the sum of 4s., then purchase a large basket, which will cost say another 4s., then buy 2s. worth of flannel blanketting and this will comprise your stock in trade, of which the total cost is 10s. A large-sized potato weighs about half-a-pound, consequently there are 224 potatoes in a cwt. Take half the above quantity of potatoes each evening to a baker’s and have them baked; when properly cooked put them in your basket, well wrapped up in the flannel to keep them hot, and sally forth and offer them for sale at one penny each. Numbers will be glad to purchase them at that price, and you will for certain be able to sell half a cwt. every evening. From the calculation made below you will see by that means you will be able to earn £2 per week. The best plan is to frequent the most crowded thoroughfares, and make good use of your lungs, thus letting people know what you have for sale. You could also call in at each public-house on your way and solicit the patronage of the customers, many of whom would be certain to buy of you. Should you have too much pride to transact the business yourself (though no one need be ashamed of pursuing an honest calling), you could hire a boy for a few shillings a week who could do the work for you, and you could still make a handsome profit weekly. The following calculation proves that £2 per week can be made by selling baked potatoes:—

“1 cwt. containing 224 potatoes sold in two evenings at 1d. each,£0188
Deduct cost,040
£0148
3
Six evenings’ sale,240
Pay baker at the rate of 8d. per evening for baking potatoes,040
Nett profit per week,£200.”

Many and most curious are the answers received from time to time by persons with sufficient faith to make application to these advertisers, the foregoing being by no means unique. One reply received in return for half-a-crown’s worth of stamps, which were to have purchased much wisdom in the way of money-saving, was this: “Never pay a boy to look after your shadow while you climb a tree to see into the middle of next week.” A man who would send his money to such evident scamps, could hardly see into the middle of anything, no matter where he chose his vantage-ground. Fortunately for the interests of the community at large, these tricksters now and again are made to feel that there is justice in the land. Twenty years ago, a City magistrate did good service by exposing a man who lived abroad in splendour at the expense of the poor governesses he managed to victimise through the advertising columns of the Times. This rascal used, by means of the most specious promises, to drag young girls to a foreign land, and there leave them to become a prey to other villains, or to make their way back accordingly as circumstances permitted. But as at the present time there are streams of foreign girls decoyed to London under all sorts of pretexts for the vilest purposes, the least said as to the criminality of one single individual among the shoals of scoundrels who live by means of advertisements the better. Since Mr Fynn was unmasked many other hawks have been captured, and only recently two have found their way into the obscurity of penal servitude under circumstances worthy of mention. Place aux dames: we will give precedence to Mistress Margaret Annie Dellair, though her retirement was subsequent to that of the other claimant on our attention. The difference of date is, however, extremely small. Mrs Dellair lived at Croydon, and for a long time lived in peace and plenty on the post-office orders, or rather the cash received in exchange for them, obtained by means of the following advertisement:—

HOME EMPLOYMENT.—Ladies in town or country wishing for Remunerative EMPLOYMENT in Laces, Church Needlework, &c., should apply at once to M. D., Fern House, West Croydon, enclosing a directed envelope. Reference to ladies employed by permission.

This must have been a fruitful source of income to M. D., who seems to have considered that people were calmly content to part with their money, as she made no attempt to put off the day of reckoning which was bound to arrive. So in due course Mrs Dellair found herself charged with fraud before the Croydon bench, and ultimately she appeared at the bar of the Central Criminal Court in April of the present year. Her mode of procedure, described during the trial, was this. Applicants in due time, after sending in their stamped and addressed envelopes, received circulars, stating that the work which the sender was able to furnish comprised braiding, point lace, tatting, church needlework, and Berlin wool. The needlework was to be done at the ladies’ homes, and they were never to earn less than eightpence or a shilling per hour. To secure employment the applicants were informed that the payment of one guinea “for registration fee, materials, and instruction,” was required, half of which sum was to be returned when the employment was resigned. Post-office orders were to be made payable at the office, Windmill Street, Croydon, to Margaret Dellair. “There is,” says a writer at the time commenting on this case, “something quite admirable in this calm repudiation of the anonymous, in this wearing of the heart upon the sleeve, on the part of Mistress Dellair. The bait she threw out was swallowed with avidity by many young ladies—some with more money than wit, others painfully anxious to secure bread-winning employment; others less solicitous about procuring work for themselves than inquisitive to discover, for the benefit of society in general and their friends in particular, whether the transaction was bonâ fide. Then the curtain rose on the second act of the drama. Some ladies sent post-office orders to Windmill Road; others took the train to Croydon, and had personal interviews with the benevolent recluse of Fern House—a little cottage near a wood—who did not fail to represent that she was extensively employed by some eminent firms of church furnishers in the metropolis.” One young lady having sent her guinea, received, after a lapse of some weeks, and after repeated communications on her part, ten toilet-mats, with the materials for braiding them. There was not enough braiding, and so she wrote for more, but received no reply. Then she finished the mats with materials purchased by herself, and despatched the articles to Croydon; but neither reply nor payment was forthcoming. After many more weeks Mrs Dellair wrote to say that she was in ill-health. Seeing, however, that the advertisement was continued in the papers, the defrauded young lady wrote to Fern Cottage, demanding the return of ten shillings, being one-half of the sum she had disbursed for “registration fee, materials, and instruction.” No answer was returned, of course; and the victim not only lost her money, but her time and her labour, to say nothing of postage, worry of mind, and other incidental expenses. One of the principal witnesses against Dellair was the Croydon postmaster, who stated that he had known her a year and a half. She had been in the habit of bringing post-office orders to his office to cash. She had brought between three and four hundred orders since July 1872, principally for guineas, but there were some for half-crowns and some for half-guineas. They were brought principally by her daughter, but sometimes by a servant. On the 30th of October 1873 a post-office order (produced) was brought to him, and the payee’s signature was that of the prisoner. He paid the money to the person who brought it. The house at which the prisoner lived was a small private house, called Fern Cottage, and there was no show of business kept up there. On cross-examination by prisoner’s counsel, the postmaster stated that the fact of so many orders being cashed by Mrs Dellair excited his suspicion. He, however, knew that she was getting her living by sending parcels of needlework by post, and since he had ascertained that fact, he did not think it so extraordinary. Mrs Dellair was in the habit of purchasing postage stamps in large quantities of him. She sometimes purchased ten shillings’ worth, and once or twice had bought them to a larger extent. At the trial the entire seat in front of the jury-box was filled by young women who attended to prosecute, some of whom had been prudent enough to ask for references, but imprudent enough to part with their guineas, although the testimonials received were not quite satisfactory. Some applicants had interviews with Dellair at Croydon, and then she gave the names of one or two eminent firms as her employers, but at the trial representatives of these firms swore that she was totally unknown to them. One of the most peculiar points in this trial was the line taken by the counsel for the defence, who argued that although the victims of his client might be deserving of sympathy, they had parted with their guineas in a foolish and careless manner, and the real question was whether the accused was guilty of a fraudulent pretence or not. The advocate raised the curious point in favour of his client, that although she had avowedly four hundred transactions with different persons, it was extraordinary that she had not been discovered and prosecuted before; but he forgot how much more extraordinary it was that for her defence the prisoner was unable to bring forward out of her four hundred clients a single witness who could swear to receiving remunerative employment from her. The defence was original, and originality in defence has a good deal to do with success when a case is being tried by a common jury; but it did not succeed, and Mrs Margaret Annie Dellair was found guilty. The woman was an impudent and abandoned swindler, who had been systematically preying for years upon a class that can, of all classes, the least afford to be cheated—decently-educated young women of small means, who fill respectable positions, and whose consequent need of employment which will enable them to earn a little something above their ordinary salaries is always pressing and frequently imperative. Before sentence was passed an inspector from Scotland Yard stated that the prisoner and her husband had formerly lived at Finchley under another name; that they had afterwards kept a shop in Bloomsbury under the title of “Fuller & Co.,” where they advertised to give “remunerative employment” both to young ladies and young gentlemen; that in May 1872 the husband was sentenced at the Middlesex Sessions to five years’ imprisonment for fraud; that on his conviction the woman removed to Fern Cottage; and that after her arrest, and its consequent publication in the papers, upwards of eighty letters had been received by the police complaining of her dealings. All that Margaret Annie Dellair could do when she was called up for sentence was to plead that she had been left in an all but penniless condition with seven young children; that she had tried in vain to obtain an honest livelihood by keeping a stall in a bazaar; and that her crime was caused by a desire to avert starvation from her innocent offspring. A good deal of sympathy was of course expressed by the public—especially by those who have nothing to lose—not for the victims, but for the victimiser. The interest taken in criminals nowadays, when they have the slightest claims to be out of the common order, would be regarded as quite overdrawn if described in a novel.

The other delinquent was not so interesting, and being only a man, did not find any hearts to bleed for him even among those who had not been deceived. His practices were provincial, his advertisement, of which the following is a copy, being inserted in the Warwickshire and London papers:—

HOME EMPLOYMENT.—Ladies (several) wanted to COPY manuscript SERMONS for supply to the clergy. Reasonable terms. Apply by letter only to R. H., 39, New-buildings, Coventry.