The Press. — London, England, 1858-08-28 00:00:00

do t made against Mrs. Yescombe in the pamphlet. Th i s poem, however, was not included in the book, because some friends bad told Mr. Landor that the pem was libellous. The book published by Mr. L a nder bad recourse to the most transparent artifice. Instead of calling this lady as he had libelled her, he n ow called her Mrs. Pescombe. The learned Baron here interposed, saying that Fomenting ought to be done to prevent the case go ing on. 11f. PHINN said his lordship was aware that counsel were now bound and could not act. Baron CHANNELL : If your client resists he must take the consequences. Mr. PHINN said he had sought for the authority and sought in vain. Baron CHANNELL : Then the defendant must take the consequences. You, of course, can't avoid it. Mr. SLaDE then resumed, and, after reading parts of some other poems, called upon the jury to attend to the case, and givo it their best consideration. The publication of the libel was proved ; 250 copies were disposed of. After a reply from Mr. Puma, who endeavoured to prove that Mr. Landor ought to be leniently treated because he was the contemporary of Byron and Moore, and consequently accustcmed to the use of immoral language, The learned BARON summed up. The action was brought for three separate libels, and for the breach of an agreement. It was an action of a very painful nature. He adopted the view taken by the learned counsel as to his position, and he had addressed to them arguments deserving of great consideration. Mr. Lander had obtained a deservedly large reputa tion, and be believed if he had retained those feel togs whim he possessed in fin mer years they would not have heard of this cause, but if lie still possessed that amount of intelligence and talent which enabled bins to issue such literary productions he (the judge) did not know how his old age should induce them to diminish the damages they would give. His lordship then went through all the facts of the case, and stated that the object of the action was not punishing the defendant, except as damages had that effect. But if it was evident there was malice, they must award compensation, although it did in fact act as a punishment. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, with damages 7501. for the three libels, and 2501. for the breach of agreement. NIX Or ONE AND HALF A DOZEN OF THE OTHER. —On Monday, at the Thames Police-court, John Planter, a tall, gentlemanly looking man, about fifty years of ace, was charged with assaulting and heating Mary Planter, his wife, a woman who is well known in this court, and whose repeated Quarrels with one of her husbands, and the repeated auramonses against them by sailor boarders, have ace,' often the subject of discussion. Mrs. PLANTER, who is about the same age as the prisoner, was fashionably attired. She stated that her husband was formerly a mariner, and that she was now the landlady of the Blacksmiths' Arms, Brook.street, Ratcliff. She married the defendant three years ago, and she was then a widow, and possessed of 4501. The prisoner soon expended the greater part of it in dissipation. He at last persuaded her to take a public-house, and promised to 'oe care • ful and not spend her money. When they took the Blacksmiths' Arms he began to ill use her and beat her. He pawned her plate, raised 151. upon it, and remained away for a fortnight. He beat her and kicked her in a most brutal manner on Friday week last, and would have murdered her but for the interference of her servant. She found him a few days ago, in company with a young prostitute, near the Surrey Theatre. She asked him for her watch, which he refused to give her, and kicked her on the back, for which she took out a warrant. His inhu• Inanity had been very great, and lie was once com mitted for one month by Mr. Yardley for a savage assault upon her. In cross examination by the defendant, Mrs. Planter said she bad been married to four husbands, and did not know what had become of two of them. ,One of them, named Jack Harris, was in Australia. s ,'e had indi c t e d hi m f or bi gamy at t h e C entra l r iminni Court, and he was acquitted. She might have lived with one only a fortnight. Would not , ' ; rear she h a d not li ved with other men. She gave the prisoner into custody at Bow street. Mr. SEISE : What for? babas T complainant fenced with the question a long d then admitted that it was for stealing her watch, Mr. Su p , z. • Don't you know your hu s band can't be envied with robbing you ? lire. 11 ' Well, I don't know. Mr. PLANTER said he hail been inveigled into an onnacelortnsate marriage with au infamous woman, and . v convicted, on per j ured ev i dence, of an assault. L r i was an attempt on the part of the woman and servant to get him back to the house. THE PRESS, AUGUST 28, 1858. ➢lr. SELFE : One would rather think the woman would be glad to get rid of you. I can't place much eeliance on what she says after the manner in which the has given her evidence. . ANNA SULLIVAN confirmed the evidence of her mistress as to the beating and kicking. ROCHE, the gaoler of the court, knew that Mrs. Harris—he meant Planter—hail nine husbands, but could not say she was married tol all of them. She had been at that court for defrauding sailors, and because be (Roche) related her true character, she had threatened him, and was held to bail by Mr. Yardley. Mr. SELFE knew the complainant too well in that court. No good could result in the defendant ever living with his wife. He held him to bail to keep the peace in his own recognizance, and advised him to go to sea again as soon 4,s possible. THE RECRUITING SERGEANT. Police-sergeant Egerton, No. 24 H, who had been directed to make inquiries after Samuel Sperling, a recruiting sergeant, who married a respectable woman, the widow of Patrick Readdy, an Irish soldier, on the 9th inst., and abandoned her on the fol lowbig day, came before Mr. Selfe, and stated that Sperling came to the Leman-street station, and gave himself up ; but as there was no charge of which be could take cognizance, or keep him in custody, he advised him to attend the court and make an expla nation. Sperling had been deprived of his situation as a recruiting sergeant, and hie uniform had been taken from him. The police-sergeant added that the staff officer of the pensioners intended to attach Sparling's pension until the 101. he had received with his newly-married wife, and which had been paid to her by the Indian Mutiny Relief Fund Committee, hail been repaid. Mr. SELFE : Then Sperling will not be employed as a recruiting sergeant any longer. EGERTON : No, sir. SAMUEL SPARLING, who had often appeared in this court with recruits in the uniform of a sergeant, and decorated with ribbons, then got into the witness-box, attired in an old and dirty suit of a civilian. He looked much chap-fallen. He stated, in answer to questions put to him by Mr. Selfe, as 'ollows :—I am a pensioned private, and have served in the army. I was a recruiting sergeant. I was married on the 9th of this month—this day fortnight—to an Irish woman, named Readdy, the widow of Patrick Readily. She was in the receipt of a pension of 7s. 6d. per week. Of clurse she lost that when she married me. She had 101. given her on the day of her marriage with me. I drew that myself on the day of the marriage. I did not want to go away from her, but she did not stop in her lodgings till I came back. I have been in different parts of the town since 1 left her on the day after our marriage, because I had missed a recruit. Two women went away with me, but they were not loose women, as reported in the newspapers, but two soldier's wives. I told the two women to wait at the Tower until I returned from Westminste:. I returned to the Tower, and the two women were gone. Mr. SELFE : Then, why not return to your wife ? SPARLING said the magistrate was too quick for him. He did not return to Backchurch-lane where his wife was staying, certainly. Mr. SELFE : The substance of your story is this. You marry on the Monday. You get 101. from the Indian Mutiny Relief Committee. You abandon your wile on the following day, and go away with two women. You expend the 101. for your own sensual gratifications, and you now come here to excuse yourself. SPARLING : I maintained that woman for a month before I married her. Mr. SELFE : What if you did ? What has that to do with it? Mrs. SPARLING : I maintained myself. I had 7s. bd. per week pension up to the day of my marriage. Mr. SEISE asked if Sperling had any other state ment to make, or any arrangement to suggest for the benefit of his wife STARLING said he did not want to make any state ment. If his wife was willing to come back, he would take her. Mr. SELFE : You left her. What has become of the 101.? STARLING evaded this question by saying he left his wife 18s. to pay two or three little debts with, and that in consequence of the untrue statements made about him, the staff officer had taken away his regimentals and dismissed him from the recruiting staff. Mr. SELFE: I think you are very properly dis. missed. I don't see that anything untrue has been said abont you. Mrs. STARLING said she ha , ' been to a relieving officer, who said he would prosecute her husband as a rogue and vagabond if he did not maintain her. SPARI.INo said that since he had left his wife he had frequattly been her, though she had nut seen him. 833 Mr. SELFE : What do you mean by that ? These are manifest falsehoods. Since Mrs. Spading was here last I have made inquiries, and have now seen you, and you have confirmed all that has been said about Sou, and I believe you to be a very worthless fellow. Smarm , * then turned round to his wife, and, in an authoritative manner, said: Doyou mean to come and live with me ? Mrs. SPARLING : No, I do not. Mr. SELFE : If you don't bring evidence to alter her statement 1 will grant a warrant against you on the application of the parish officer-. SPA. R. LING then turned round and marched out of the court as rapidly as possible. THE BRIAMIST.—At the Central Criminal Court, on Saturday last, berme the Common Sergeant, Alexander Charles Borromeo, who was convicted on the previous Monday of bigamy, was again placed at the bar by the direction of the learned judge. It will be remembered that when the prisoner was brought up to he tried, ho made a very pressing re quest that his trial might be postponed, to give him an opportunity of producing certain witnesses from Paris, who he said could prove that he was in that city when the marriage between him and Miss Sadleir was alleged to have taken place, in 1842. It was believed at the time, however, that it was merely an attempt to obtain delay and cause annoyance to the prosecutors, and the application was consequently refused, and it turns out that this view of the matter was correct. The COMMON SERGEANT, addressing the prisoner, said that he had sent for him to inform him of the result. of an application he had made to the Pre fecture of Police of Paris respecting certain parties whose evidence be desired to obtain. A communi cation had just been received from huts, the effect of which was that no trace of such persons as he (the prisoner) bad mentioned could be aiscovered, and they did not seeni to have ever been in existence. There did not therefore appear to be the slightest ground for doubting the propriety of the verdict of the jury, and the sentence of four years penal servi tude, to commence trom the month of June, 1850, would therefore be carried out. When the prisoner was tried, he was fashionably dressed and wore a long black beard and moustache, and during the trial he conducted himself in a most impudent manner. Since his conviction, however, he has been attired in the convict dress, his beard and moustache have been shaved off pursuant to the prison regulations, and he presented a most crest fallen and dejected appearance. He made no reply to the statement of the learned Common Sergeant, and when he had concluded lie walked hastily from the bar, apparently glad to escape from the public gaze. COMMISSION OF LUNACY. ON Monday a commission of lunacy was opened before Mr. Commissioner Winslow and a special jury, in the large ball of St. Clement's•inn, Strand, for the purpose of ascertaining the state of mind of Lawrence Ruck, Esq., of Sittinghourne, Kent, and Montgomery shire. Mr. Montagn Chambers, Q.C., Mr. Sergeant Bal lantine, and Mr. Vaughan, appeared for the petitioner (the wife of the alleged lunatic), and \lr. Edwin James, Q.C., Mr. Sergeant Petersdorff, and Mr. Gordon Allen fur the alleged lunatic, who was present from the commencement._ This gentleman is a military•looking, rciddle•aged mau, with a dark moustache, and having nothing in his appearance indicative of insanity to an ordinary observer. He was seated behind his counsel, Mr. E. James, with whom he frequently communicated, as if suggesting questions for cross-examination. After a short address from the Commissioner in opening the proceedings, Mr. MONTAGU CHAMBERS, Q.C., proceeded to open the case. Their duty, lie said, was to inquire into the state of mind of a gentleman, named Lawrence Huck, possessed of considerable property, who con ducted himself with the greatest decorum and affec tion towards all his family till last year, when it was found necessary to place him under the care of Dr. Stillwell, the proprietor of an asylum at fling(len, near Uxbridge, on the sili of November. As this was a case of the utmost importance to his wife, children, and himself, lie (the learned counsel) begged the attention of the jury while he entered into some details. Mr. Buck was possessed of pro perty in Kent and elsewhere to the extent of about 1,5001. a year, and seventeen years ago he was rimmed . iu the daughter of Mr. Ma t th e w s , of Pantllndw, 10 Montgomeryshire, where he went to live. He took the lease o f a house lint? grounds there, which being in a dilapidated condition needed repairs, but never had those repairs effected. lie lived with his grea test possible h appiness, wife and children in the he until at last there appeared to be certain delu sion s in his mind, which bad the effect of entirely changing