The Sun. — London, England, 1802-12-25 00:00:00

ISt :a, LAW REPokr. COURT OF KING's BENCH, Dic--24. 11??vsGis RLFORE LORD ELLENDOROWCH AND A SP ;GILL JURY, IN GUILDHALL, LONDON. CRINI. CON. 'LINGHAM V. HUNT. THIS was an Mtion for Criminal Conversation of the Defendant with the Plaintiff's Wife. Mr. GARRow opened the Case on the part of the plain t iff. He observed, it was a great satisfaaion t ° him to have the honour of addressing such a resPedable jury as he now saw, far he had to bring before them a subjeal of great importance. The l aintiff complained of the Defendant, that he had debauched his wife. It was a very grave complaint, the discussion of which would be important to the f.sciety in which we live, in point of morals, al though it came in the shape of a Civil AEtion. We lived in an age in which questions of this nature "me into frequent and melancholy discussion in C ourts of Justice, and in most of which his Learned friend, who was not yet arrived (Mr. ERSKINE) , w ho was of Counsel with' Mr. GIBBs for the De fendant i n t his ca se, had generally had the care of l aintifis in these aftions, and the Public:were much indebted to him for the share he had in the endea vauts made in Courts of Justice to repress this vice ;_ had thesese endeavours had hitherto been ineffea ua l , or at least not produced the effeal to be desired, a i n -v "lstanaling which Courts of Justice must con "tie their exertions in the only way they had Power fo r this purpose, until it may occur to the wi sdom of the Legislature to annex to this vice the p u nishment of a crime. The present case he stated as t ne most aggravated that ever came into a Court of Justice, and therefore would call on the justice of the Jury to look upon the Record, and go the foil length They were there warranted to go, which was the ex tent of 50001. For this Defendant had been guilty of all those alts which tend to aggravate a case of this kind. He was the Friend and Confidant Compa nion of the Plaintiff, and he, while he was thus professing that friendship, and in the possession of that confidence, debauched the Plaintiff's wife.--s It was a case of absolute purity on•the part of the ?laintifF, and absolute profligacy on the part of the Defendant. On behalf of the Plaintiff, he invited, nay he challenged his opponents, with all their paw_ ers, to shew a single fault in his chara&er and con.. tiaa towatds his wife ; and when they had done, he Would tell theni that lie did not mean to abate one shilling of the damages. stated upon this Record. Although he had long communications from his Clie n t, he would not state them up to their extent, that was beyond his power ; but he should borrow a phrase from his Learned Friend, and say, that in the.condti& of this Defendant, he was able to trace the Adulterer's Course: and a part of this course `was this-a-when he had succeeded in debauching, or perhaps when he had not completed his objed, but had reason to hope he soon should, he looked about him hoar he was to fence against Justice, and gene rally he persuaded the viEtim of his lust to be instrumental in shewing something against the cha tatter of the Plaintiff. Something known only to herself and some domestic, and this was to be made vp into negligence in the husband, so that he was not to be entitled to Damages - in a Court of Justice. Something, perhaps, of this kind might be attempt ed to-day, unless, indeed, the discretion of, th e Learned Counsel was allowed to over-rule the ini quitous disposition of the Defendant ; but if it thaold, he knew who would be the sufferer by it. The Plaintiff's wife was now under what the De fendant called his protedion, but -the truth was, that she lived with him in the most degraded state that a . woman can be in, having lost her virtue, and with it, of course, her charnter—so that she could Ito more, be received into that decent circle of friends and acquaintance, to which she was once an orna- Th em, and therefore, she was now driven by dire necessity to embark in the iniquity of the Defend °,,nts and enter on one common cause with him---- Some things of this kind he was prepared to expert, for they had been thrown out with a view of de terring the Plaintiff from coining forward in a Court of Justice, but they had not the desired dila.— lie should now proceed to shew how these parties came together. The Plaintiff was a very young man, and in partnership with a• Gentleman of the name of Hopley ; in the trade of a wine merchant. He was married on the 16th of August, 'Soo, to the Lady whose miscondua with the Defendant formed the subjed of inquiry to-day.' She was only 18 Years of age when married, but extremely handsome and well accomplished. They lived near to the Defendant, who isengaged in the same line of trade, who was also at that dine married to a very amiable and most deserving Lady; for. Mrs. Hunt had all those good qualities which render acquaintance and friendly intercourse between families most desirable; accordingly ; as Mr. Lingham and. Mr. Hunt were intimate, Mrs, Hu nt arid Mrs. Lingham became friendly also, and visited each other frequently.--a Soon afterwards Mrs. Hunt died in child.bed, the infant surviving. On this occasion Mr. Hunt con duaed himself as a man should, with great tender ness to the infant, and great apparent sorrow for the loss of its mother. Left thus, without the pro_ tetion of the mother, it became necessary to find Out somebody to take care that all servants, and those who had the charge of nursing the infant, should riot negle& their duty, and Mrs. Lingham took upon herself this kind office, which naturally drew the families closer together than they had been Yet. It was in this state, sacred as it was by all the affetlion of the two families, and rendered still Te so by the kindness of Mrs. Lingham, that the Defendant, Mr. Hunt, meditated the diabolical 1,02 ar! of seduci n g the Plaintiff' s wife, of which the - Pi jatiff had not the least reason to be jealous, for the two'families had been in the constant habit of 7 . l siting each other, nor was there the least diminu ':nn in the affeaion of Mrs. Lingham to her husband, 24 - this would appear from the evidence of the Witnesses on both sides, if the Defendant was in ack :ht,; enough to insist on his Counsel calling any ; ° to his astonishmenta on the Sth of July last, wh en Mrs Lingham,: who had been attending the f . °l " Ge rat . - 01 the day in his business, came homey he ie wife Nvll not there. The evening having '‘ a , a"eed he honed s he Mi g h t b e a t h e r father's.— ase seat • she oWas taut awe, He n t tc”cocother -6f he relations, but no tidings could be had of Ler . ; at last he concluded that she had gone to the house of some friend. As the night advanced, he thought a thousand things that might have befallen his wire, but. had no idea of the thing which had actually happened, namely, that his own confidential friend had induced her to elope with him, to the dishonctir of all the farnily, and ruin of herself. The jury should guess his astonishment when he received a letter from the Defendant, which Mr. GARRow said he should read to the Jury, by which the De fendant's guilt would appear in its true light. He charged on the Defendant, that he pursued the course of the most iniquitous Adulterer ; that he formed a deliberate plan for the seduction of the Plaintiff's wife, to. the violation of die most sacred ties of friendship, in breach of all the rules of hos pitality, in treachery to all. the trusts reposed in him. By what evidence was this to be made out ? By the Defendant's own evidence, for this would appear from the Defendant's own letter, by which he charaaerized his own conduct, after which it was doubtful whether he ought to be permitted to say any thing that could reduce the damages one shilling below that which was stated upon the Re- Cord, for the damages he had by his own condud estimated. he letter which the Defendant sent on the 9th of July was as follows : SIR, " With sorrow, great, how can I announce to you, you have most inis,:rably misplaced in me your confidence ; your wife cannot return but with your forgiveness, which is im possible—l think I see, however, the situation of my poor brother, who, as well as Eliza, yourself, and myself, must go distracted. Still your's, " JOS. HUNT." Mr. GARROW having commented on this Letter, then proceeded to detail the rest of the Case. That about ten o'clock at night on the Bth of July last, the Defendant prevailed on the Plaintiff's wife to go w ith him in an Hackney coach to Windmill_ street, where he took a post chaise, and having delivered two letters to the proprietor of the chaise, direding him to send them immediately to the city, went off to Barnet, arrived at the Green Man Inn that night, and there he and Mrs. Lingham slept in one bed, and had lived in adultery ever since.— Having thus briefly opened the outline of the Case, he desired to know what was to be offered for the Defendant in it by way of extenuation of his offence, and he said he should be glad to know what damages could be said to be too large. He had heard it said indeed, the City of London was a bad venue for an Alion for Criminal Conversatioai, as if notions of Honour, and the value of happiness in connubial life, diminished in this mighty Capital when we came Eastward of Temple Bar. No such thing---they `were gross and impudent libellers who said so, and they were ignorant of the real feel ings of London Merchants, who indeed tendered the comforts cf human life and every thing that was estimable in the human charader, as well as any body of men in the world ; and why should they not ? Who were more deeply interested in the well-being of Society than they were ? He con cluded with repeating, that after the whole of this Case was gone through, he was confident that the Jury would give the whole amount of the damages , stated in the Record. The marri:lge of the Plaintiff with his wife, then Eliza Dixon, spinster, was then proved by the Rev. Mr. Batt, who officiated, and by Jos. Dixon, the Lady's brother. It took place on the 16th of Aug. ISOo, in the Parish church of. Sr. Botolph Without, Aldgate. Miss Frances Merehant.--" I am perfe ly well acquainted with M r . an d M rs. Li ngham ; I was i n El the habit of visiting at their house; I have re. sided with them rather more than a week at a time. I have been with them more than once ; they ap_ peated to me to he living very happily together. They had a child ; I never saw in their deportment towards each other, any thing which led me to believe that they were not entirely happy. I visited them in 'Sot. I live in Islington. I be lieve" was on a visit in the family in the beginning of the present year also." Benjamin Watets—" I know the Plaintiff per_ feetly well. I have known him from his child hood ; we were at school together. He is about my age, 27 or 28. lam married ; have a family that was in the habit of visiting Mr. and Mrs. Lingham. Mr. Lingham behaved towards his wife in every resped as an exemplary husband, as far as I had an opportunity of knowing, and these oppor tunities were very frequent. He and Mrs. Ling_ ham appeared to me to be perfealy happy ; indeed remarkably so. I think that Mrs. Lingharn visited at my house up to July in the preient year, and up to that period they appeared to me to live happily together." Cross.examined by Mr. E.RSKIWE, he said, " I am well acquainted with Mr. and Mrs. Lingham; they visited rny family frequently. I remember hearing a conversation about their having gone to see the 'illuminations. I remember Mrs. Lingham saying something about their separation in the nigh t of the illumination, perfeetly well, but nothing about a tavern ; but that she and a Gentleman had supped together, and had fared better than the rest of the company, who were obliged to put up with what they could get at a Pastry-cook's. That they had separated from the rest of the company opposite to M. Otto's house, and could not find their com pany, who went to: a Pastry-cook's; but that they had fared better, and had supped. Mr. Lingham heard Mrs. Lingham say this ; and he treated it with that raillery or badinage which a man, who had confidence in the virtue of his wife, would do a trifling thing -so small.. He spoke to me, but I gave no opinion upon the matter. I do not now think there was any thing bad in it, from the man. ner in which it was related : the idea that I had was, that they had supped at some, friend's house. There was nothing that .passed which led me to suppose any thing against the virtue of Mrs. Lingham. Ido not know who the ecutpany were, but there were Ladies and Gentlemen present. Mr. Lingham joked about it, and said it was very well for her that she fell into such good quarters." Mr. Dixon, brother ro the Plaintiff's wife—" I was one of the party who went to see the illumina tion; my family and that of Mr. Lingharrt went together. There were twenty of us nearly The crowds 1n alrriGzt all parts , wcm inauenseo We missed part of our company when we o,u n 4 Mrt , . C.)tt(l'6. Mrs. tingitani vas u►uder the care of Mr. Mint, And One of - my sisters and Mrs. Lingham' . sister were under the care of Mr. Lingham, separated indeed before we came to M. Otto's; at Mr. Hope's house; from whence we went to M. Otto's, and afterwards we went to a Pastry-cook's and took some refreshment, and then came home. It did not strike me to be any thing extraordinary, that in so great a crowd some of our party should be missing from the rest." Cross-examined by Mr. ERSKINE, he said, " I am the brother of this Lady ; it so happened that Mr. Hunt had the care of Mrs'. Lingham. Mr. Hunt was an entire stranger to me. We walked all the way from Tower-hill to Cavendish-square, and during all that time Mr. Hunt had the care of Mrs. Lingham. They separated from us about eleven o'clock, but I cannot say eadly the time. We went round the Square, to set if we could find them. Mr. Lingham did not accompany u.s in our search. When we came back we found him, but not Mrs. Lingham and the Gentleman who was with her. I remained with the rest of the com pany. I should suppose it was near two o'clock before we reached home. We went to a Pastry cook's in St. James's Street in our return home. Mrs. Linghatn, I believe, did not come home then ; but I did not go to Mr. Lingharn's house. I have heard, that Mrs. Lingham supped with Mr. Hunt that night. I have known, that since that affair happened, Mr. Hunt drove. her out in his chaise." Mrs. Sarah Lingharn. " lam the mother of the Plaintiff.--I remember his marriage with Miss Dixon ; I have seen them often after marriage : I have every reason to believe that they were as happy as any two laeople could be. She was an agreeable, accomplished young woman. I never saw any body more attentive to a wife than the Plaintiff was to his, insomuch, that I should be happy to have a daughter of mine treated with the same kindness and affetion. I saw them down to the very time of her elopement. I only know Mr. Hunt by name. I know my daughter a in-law was intimate with Mrs. Hunt : I have heard both my son and daughter speak of Mrs. Hunt." Mr. Newman, the stable keeper in Windmill_ street, and his two boys, proved that the Defendant, Mr. Hunt, and Mrs. Lingham, came to his house in a hackney-coach on the Bth of July, about half after ten, and took a post-chaise to go to Barnet. That Mr. - Hunt gave to Mr. Baily two letters, direled to persons in the City, and which were delivered the following morning at six o'clock, the one of them to the Plaintiff's father by mistake, who delivered it immediately afterwards to the Plaintiff; the Other to the Defendant's brother. That he was taken in the post-chaise to Barnet. Sarah Lintel, chamber-maid at the Green Man at Barnet, proved that the Defendant and the Plain tiff's wife arrived at the inn about half after one o'clock, where they supped, and then went to bed, and slept in one bed all night. That a Gentleman came and asked for Mr. Hunt the next morning, and the chamber-maid went up, when' she saw the Lady in bed. She knew her name was Lingham, for she saw that svritten at full length upon her stocking ; that Gentleman went away in the course of the morning, returned, again, and went away a second time before Mr. Hunt and Mrs. Lieg ham. Mr. Hunt went out into the Town and bought some stockings for Mrs. Lingham, fur those she had were very dirty. It thenappeared, that Mt. Hunt and Mrs. Ling_ ham called at the house of Mrs. Lingham's'Laun_ dress at Holloway, and there took change of clothes. The Defendant's letter to the Plaintiff in Tower street, where they both live and carry on trade. as Wine Merchants, of which we gave a copy in our sketch of the Speech of Mr. GARROW, was then given in and read. Mrs. Fillairst, who lives at Eltham, proved that a Mrs. Robinson took lodgings in her . house, and that Mr. Hunt and Mrs. Lingham lived together there, going by their names of Mr. Hunt and Mrs. Lingham, and making no secret of it. • Here the Case for the Plaintiff closed. Mr.. ERSKINE made a long - and very eloquent speech on behalf of the Defendant, in which he admitted the wisdom of the principle on which these Ac tions had been determined, and professed entire attachment to that moral rectitude which keeps us together in society, and which adultery t€nds to disturb. He admitted that his Client could not be justified in what he did-; on the contrary, he,. though his Counsel, was bound to blame him ; but yet he maintained there were shades innumerable in this offence. Where a man,-had violated all the rules of Hospitality, the ties of Friendship, and had been a deliberate seducer, he deserved every scourge that could be inflitted on him in a Court of justice ; but where he had been exposed to a blaze of beauty, without that sort of caution from the hus band, who was the natural guardian of the honour of the wife, and where the husband had been re miss and negligent as to the safety of the wife, and had permitted her, who was young and beautiful, gay and lively, to be too often unheeded and alone in the company of the Defendant, who was also an unmarried man ; and where a man under such cir cumstances had not been proof against so much temptation, he was the objed of the compastiion of men of feeling, nor should he be rigorously treated in a Court of Justice. Such he contended •to be the case of his Client, the present Defendants The parties were indeed all of them objets of great compassion ; he did not censure the Plaintiff—most undoubtedly his loss was great. He did not justify the Defendant, for most assuredly his condad was criminal ; but he submitted that it was not the con dud of an hardened offender,. but of one whose sorrow and repentance accompanied his transgres sion. This, Mrs ERSKINE submitted, was to be inferred from the letter he wrote to the Plaintiff. He was sorry for what had happened : but it would appear that the Plaintiff had repeatedly been ad monished of the impropriety of allowing his wife and the Defendant to be so much together ; but that he had been careless notwithstanding ; had suffered them to go out riding. together, and instead of ac companying them, had gone a fishing, Seca and had, under pretence of taking. care of his wife, sent an infant with-. her and the Plaintiff on their elusions. , When ; they came home, he had only cotarriairml thi3 they wete late, and said, his wite r - r • . . not.st:iy ou'c. S')late ; but Litt tzai they shotild net go together any more, which he ought to have. That he lived opposite io the house of the DAmd int ; and tln after the Ds!..t fendant and the Plait:6ll'llA come into the Defend.:. ant's house, after they had been out all day together; be had sent for the k , ,vs to get what he wanted !or himself, and left his wile with the Defendant at sup.,. per, where they were together nhtil eleven at. night - . That on the night of the illmnination for tll Peacci a large party went out together front Tower-stteet.t The Plaintiff, instead of taking care of his wife,; allowed that charge to be taken by the Mfendant s he taking another :Lady tinder his arm. That Wiled they came to the house of M. Otto, they scparated i t %, hen the Plaintiff she wed no anxiety about his wife,; while some of the company went to seek for them. That the Defendant and the Plaintiff's wiP supped togetiier, and that at a Tavern. That above all, the Plaintiff's wife told him that she had supped at a Tavern with the Defendant, who treated tile that-1 ter with raillery or badinage, as tine of the Wit_ nesses described it. Here. Mr. Ertsr.r NE ini , isted upcii it he ought to have stopped the acquaintance of his wife and the Defendant :e he ought to have told " hitherto I ain willing to believe that you have not dishcinoureci me, but it is fitting that We shill be two. I forbid you my house for the•futUre . , and, I will take care that neither myself or any pact of my fatnily ;•h..111 come into -your's ;" and if the De fendant had afterwards visited his wife, the Plaintiff' would have been justified in using the extreme of violence towards him, for it would then have been planting a dagger in the bosom of the Plaintiff' by his presence ; but unfortunately the Plaintiff had wanted that species cf firmness which was requisite on this occasion; he had been remiss and negligent; and although that would not excuse the Deft:dant, it would greatly mitigate the damages in this ease. —He expatiated upon these topics at considerable length with his usual ability, and concluded with observing, that where the Plaintiff had been so negligent, and claimed damages in a civil aEtion s for the loss of that, to preserve which, it was his : duty .to be careful, he should not take advantage of. his own negligence, and obtain large damages against the roan who, next to himself, had been mast unfortunate. Mr. Charles Hunt examined by Mr. Gists.---- " I am the brother of the Defendant : previous td the time when this unfortunate event took place, I was not very much in the habits of intercourse with him, for I had had a difference ttith him : that dif.; Terence took place on account of this transaBion : I was one of the party who 'vent to see_tlie tions : I went with the party from Tower street Mr. and Mrs. Lingham were of the party, which was about twenty in number, my brother was one of them ; he had the care of kl,rs. Lingham, and she took his arm ; she is about twenty, aria she is very handsome : Mr. Lingham was walking alone, and flinging crackers• about the Ladies —When we got to Cavendish-square, at Mr: Hope's, we separated and made three parties l my brother and Mrs. Lingham were lost to us we went in search of them, but Mr. Lingham did not join in the pursuit, but her brother and myself did ; we went partly around the square,, but we could not find them. Mr. Lingham did not expresl any apprehension, but seemed very careless.: I believe he did not go in pursuit of his wife. We then went to M. OTTO'S in Portm:4n-qitare, and. from thence to the Pastry Cooll's in Saint.fames's street, where we refreshed ourselves ; I had not seen any thing of Mrs. Lingham at that time, not' had any steps been taken by Mr. Lingham to find where she was. From the Pastry Cdok's we went through the City home. When we got home in quiry was made for . Mrs. Lingham, hut she was not returned. We got home between , two and After we had got out of the square we had no difficulty in getting away: I do not know wheri Mrs. Linghain came home. Afterwards, and on the first of May, I saw Mr. Lingharri, and a party was proposed for Mrsi Lingham that day. I was at tea with Mrs. Lingham and some ladies: Mt: Lingham came to the room : Mt's. Lingham said to .Mr. Lingham, that, Mr. Hunt had desired her 10 take a ride the next day with him in his chaise: I observed.to Mr. Lingham, he had better borrow ms brother's other horse to go with them ; Mr. Ling.. ham declined it, saying that he was going a fishing: Mrs. Lingham did go out with my brother' thd next day ; Mr. Lingham `did not accotripany thetrio but went a fishing.l remember Mr. Hurst and Mrs. Lingliath returning that evening ; they came to my brother's about eight in the evening ; while they were there Mr. Lingliam sent for a certairt key.. CHIEF JUSTICE. Q. To Mrs. ?---4 A. To Mrs. Lingham : she sent it, and con: tinted at my brother's after that i she staid to sup per, and after supper, till eleven at night. Mr- Lingharri.was invited, but did not come over, On the Sunday following, I was one of a party at Ken. sington Gardens, with Mrs: Lingham and Mr.. Hent t there were about a dozen of us. Eefore they went to Kensington Gardens, they took a cheon at my brother's house ; Mrs Lingham .was there, and Miss Dixon, with some Country Friends, There was then some conversation concerning what' passed on the night, of the ilhnnination. Mrs.; Lingham observed, that she had been at a Tavern with my brdther, and had some beef and a cool tankard. Mr, Lingham observed, that they had fared better than we had, for that we had been obliged to put up with a Pastry Cook's Shop. Ido not reA member that Mr. Lingham took any further notice. —After this we went to Kensington Gardens, Mrs.: . Linghatn and. Mr. Hunt together. My brother and Lingham attended Mrs. Lingham in the Gar dens. On the I irh of May I remember Mrs,- Lingham going out with my brother--I am speak ing of the • tith of . Maya. It was Saturday the Ist of May, that I offered Mr. Lingham the horse, It was Sunday the zd that they went out, and she gave hire the key: It was Sunday the oth, when the conversation took place about going to the tavern. I remember their r,ettnning home on the rzth, before that Mr. Linghain was with tte at my brother's . house. I went with him to fence by his desire. I was standing at a neighb4ut he took me by the coat, and slid lievishcdrhe to go _atad.fence with him, and that he had something par_ ' tiZtliar t 4 communicate; I had a prim' engavtnent 1 S