The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1872-08-10 00:00:00

BREACHES OF PROMISE.

AN EXTRAORDINARY CASE.

their a
Sheep of Wineheste ahe said, a—a same ed suci-an-de
The cause of " Macionnell c Kempe," has been tried at
the assizes held at Guildford, and wsa a case of considerable
importance to the clergy of the Church of England and to Seetain, and the Bishop of Lincoln and the late Bishop
the members of that Church, and of very considerable public of Salisbury. He did not know, he said, that the Arch-
interest. It was an action by one dense man against another bishop of Canterbury bad resolved to grant no more
arising out of the celebration by one of them in the church licences for such maariages. He admitted that it would
be material, with reference to such scruples, that the
of the other of a marriage between persona who had com-
mitted adultery. The case Is thus reported by The Timis : clergyman asked to celebrate Rich a marriage should
The action was by the Rev. George Alcock Mae- know that the woman to be married had been divorced,
tmhiegilri t
firstnaturally in ter,
itew in
Me.el i o n
Ka.n,..
pe He
~po k
, i
donnell who for 18 years has been a clergyman of the and that if the information was improperly withheld
Church's! England. and was curate of Lower Normal
, tmisiettieedeutri that natt
ad-
against the Rev. J. E Kempe, rector of St. Jamma
Westminster, for libel, under these circumetandee. to him most courteously and kindly. Ile admitted
The plaintiff, the Rev. Mr. Macdonnell, at the be- that the parties to be married were et that very time
ainuing of this year, was acting as curate of Lower living together in the parish of St. Jam: s's, though,
not the formal pNorwood under the Rev. Mr. Randolph, the vicar, and of comae, be said,e
that the rector of an extensive and
though, through some accident. he had oput me parish lik eould not postdate be rx
licence of the Bishop of Winchester (in whose peeted to know all those who were livilig in his
diocese Nerwood is situate), he acted with his lordsbar's }math. So for as he knew, Mr. Kemre was not
sanction ; and, ise his irimeme was only 2130 a year, the at all aware of their position. iseked if he had ever
Bishop had obtained him an addition of £2O a year had a licence from the Biehop of Winchester, the
from the Curates' Augmentation Fund. Mr. abeelent• plaintiff admitted that he had not a writteu licence,
nell was acquainted with a gentleman named Hope, but bail his sanction. He admitted that he had not
who, in January last, staked him if be would have had any cure in the diocese of London within the last
any objection to perform the marriage ceremony for a year, but said he had within the last two years load a
woman who had been divorced from her husband on the cure at Bethnal-green and a licence. The 48± Canon
ground of adultery. Mr. Macdonnell said that he was here referred to, which rues thus :—" No curate
should have no objection, and it was arranged that he shall be permitted to serve in any parish without ex-
should celebrate the marriage. Mr. Hope's friend amination and admission of the Bishop in writing under
was a Mr. Hampson Jones, who lived in the parish his hand and seal." The witness admitted that in
of St. James's, Piccadilly, of which the Rev. Mr. June, 'lB7O, he had resigned his curacy at Bethnal-
Kempe is rector, and it was stated that he had green, where he was for four years and a half; and
previously committed adultery with the lady, who, after that he had no licence or permission from the
on the 16th of January, had been divorced on that Bishop to officiate elsewhere in the diocese.
ground from her husband. They were extremely The learned Berea, in the count of this cross-ex-
anxious to have the marriage ceremony performed, anaivation, said he could not quite see the relevancy of
and on that account it was desired to celebrate it at all this to the alleged libel, This., he said, was an
once. On the 16th of January the licence was obtained action for libel, and he was trying that action, and
from the Archbiehop of Canterbury, and it stated that hail no desire to enter into matters of ecclesiastical law.
the lady had been divorced for adultery. On the 25th In re-examination the plaintiff said he had acted for
of January Mr. Macdonnell waited upon the Rev- four and a half years in Bettinabgreen, under a written
Mr. Km:ripe to inform him of the arrangement and licence from the Bishop of London, which had never
obtain his consent to the use of his church for the been revoked, and his name had remained on the
purpose. It should here be stated that it was doubt- register at Whitehall ; and although he had not had the
fad whether the assent was required. The 57th section leithop of Winchester's written licence to officiate at
of the Divorce Act provides that, though parties Norwood, he was there with the Bishop's knowledge
divorced might marry, no clergyman should be and sanction.
compelled to celebrate the marriage of nuy person In support of the plaintiff's case Mr. Hope was
whose former marriage hid been dissolved on called, who stated that he had known the lady for
the ground of adultery ; and the 58th section 20 years. She was the daughter of the Hon. Richard
provides that when any minister of any church Cavendish, and he had at her request asked about the
should refuse to perform the marriage ceremony he marriage, with the knowledge of her father, whom he
should permit any other minister of the Church of Eng- I had known for 40 years. lie had also known Mr.
land to perform the ceremony in the said church. I Macdonnell for 18 years. The lady's father sanctioned
However, Mr. Macdonnell saw Mr. Herniae, and asked the marriage, and would have been present at it had
his consent to celebrate a marriage in his church, not he been able, but as he was unable the witness attended
stating anything as to the position of the parties. It in his place, and he confirmed the plaintiff's evidence
appeared that Mr. Kempe, in common with many of as to what then occurred as above stated. Mr. Ran-
the clergy and some of the Bishops, entertained strong (Mph, the vicar of Lower Norwood, was also called as
objections, on conscientioue grounds, ageinet the inter- a witness, and proved that in consequence of
marriage of persons in such a position. Mr. Macdonnell, Bishop's letter he Slismissed the plaintiff. The letter
however, was personally a stranger to Mr. Kempe, and to the secretary of the Augmentation Fund was relied
stated that he was not aware of his objections to such upon as evidence of malice. This was the plaintiff's
marriages. He said nothing, at all events, as to the case.
position of the parties. He simply stated that he was Mr. Hawkins submitted that there was no ease,
curate of Lower Norwood, the incumbent of which, It was not proved that the plaintiff was legally a
Mr. Randolph, was known to Mr. Kempe, who at curate, as he was not legally licensed.
once gave his consent. On the 29th of January, se- The learned Judge, however, overruled that objec-
cordingly, the parties attended for the purpose of the tion. It was enough that he was officiating as curate.
marriage, and when the clerk looked at the licence and Mr. Hawkins then objected that the words coin-
ease that it was for the marriage of a woman who had pleased of were not spoken of the plaintiff in his
been divorced, he said he must communicate with Mr. character as a clergyman, but only of his conduct in a
Kempe, who was in the vestry, and who at once particular matter.
desired to see Mr. Macdonnell, and said to him, " I
that
learned Judge said his present impression was
Bishop passage by passage, can't allow this marriage to proceed ; I have set my
face against such marriages, and will not allow them in taat there was no libeL Reading the letter to the
my church." Mr. Macdonnell said, "You cannot flee- he said it was all perfectly
true upon the facts, and so no libel, down too the last
vent it ; the parties are your parishioners." Mr.
Kempe said, "1 can and will prevent it ; send for the passage, "It is, in my view, a gross case of unjustiti-
bridegroom." The parties being called in, the Act able concealment," &c. The learned Judge said he
was referred to and the sections above alluded to thought this was only Mr. Kempe's expressicu of
were read; and Mr. Macdonnell pointed out that opinion on the subject, and that it was no libel,
they distinctly provided that no incumbent could Mr. Serjeant Parry submitted that it was for the
refuse the use of his church for such a purpose. jury, but
Mr. Kempe then said. "You are not a competent The learned Judge said if the alleged libel was con-
minister of the Church of England for the pier- Mined in the writing, it was for the Judge to say if it
pose." Mr. alaedonnell asked why? Mr. Kempe an. was not libellous, and if he thought it wag not so, then
swered, "Because you are not licensed in a London it Was his duty to atop the cam ; but if he thought it
diocese." To which Mr. Macdonnell replied that he • woo a libel, then he must submit it to the jury. He
had kr many years had a licence in the mocese or thought the letter no libel, but he would consult his
Louden, and it had never been revoked. Mr. Kempe brother Bramwell. The learned Judge accordingly
said, "It was revoked by the granting of a licence in retired for the purpose of doing so, and upon his return
a new diocese." To this Mr. Macdonnell replied that said he would leave the case to the jury, but he would
it was not revoked until a new licence was issued, and reserve leave to the defendant to move to enter a non-
that the licence in the diocese of 'Winchester bad suit.
never been actually issued. Mr. Kempe, however, said, It was then-submitted by the counsel for the defend-
"At your peril, Sir, celebrate this man iage." Mr. ant that it was a privileged communication, but
Macdonnellrepliedthatwhatheproposentodowaseither The learned Judge said he and his brother Bramwell
legal or illegal • if legal, Mr. Kempe ought to allow it tliiught it was not so, and that there was a case for the
to go forward; if illegal, quietly prevent it. Mr. jury.
Kenitra mid, " i will net allow thin marriage; I pro- Mr. Hawkins submitted that there was no case on
test against it. How do I know whether you are in- the counts for slander, and
deed in Holy Orders or cot? Produce your letters of The learned Judge add he thought there was none
orders." Mrs -Macdonnell said, " I taild you whose curate There Was only a strong expression of opinion, and no
1 was, and if you doubted it, why did you not then in- evidence of malice. There was no case for slander.
quire? You took it for granted then, why dispute it now." Mr. Hawkins therefore, after a brief commit:thou,
Mr. Kempe said " I Perk it for granted that you were a intimated that he should not call Mr. Kempe as a
very different person from what you are. But I have witness, and should tender no evidence.
been deceived and trapped ;it is nothing but a trick." Mr. Ser'eant Parry then addressed the jury for the
Mr. Macclonneli then said, "It is near twelve; have
we your permission to proceed with the marriag , • ... I
. eneantin upon the case as it stood, commenting upon
e . the conduct of Mr. Kempe, and denouncing it ae " un-
To this Mr. Kempe replied, "I suppose I can't prevent worthy of a Christian gentleman." He characterized
it, but proceed at your peril." I will write to your
Ma Maalonnell ass one of the "working clergy," and
vicar, will write to the Curates' Augmentation Fund; contrasted his position with that of Mr. Kempe—the
I will write to your Bishop • I will bring it befete
Lon-
AN ACTION AGAINST A COUNTY Convocation." Mr. Kempe al'eo prohibited the officials incumbent of one of the wealthiest parishes in
d Mr. Kempe, h said, might have made a re'
COURT JUDGE. of the church from taking any part in the ceremony, ; monstrance but, instead, he had written a libeL He
and declared it to ben deeecration of the house of God.
At the Norwich assizes, the cause of " Johnson o Cooke" In consequence of this the officials did not attend, and, had written' against Mr. Macdonnell in every quarter
has been tried, and was an action whist alr. W. it. Cooke, • where he could injure him—to his incumbent, to his
Q fi., a County Court Judge—The case is taus reported in m consequence, some awkwardness entered. However, Bishop' to the secretary of the Augmentation Fund,
The Times— the marriage Was celebrated, and immediately after. I
, If he had been called as a witness,. it could have
de the 'duties vs-cuttink the vestry. Mr. Kempe then I
The declaration contained three counts, the first and warsaid to them, "I've now found out that the whole I been elicited from bins what he lead said in Con'
third of which were for false imprieonment, and the . vocation, and his counsel, therefore, bad shown
thing is illegaL" Mr. Macdonnell answered that it
second for assault. The evidence went to show that , his usual acuteness in nut ealling him as a wit-
was a pity he had not found this out before he allowed
the plaintiff in this action had been defendant in I ness. The letter now sued upon was the letter
the marriage to proceed, Mr. Keinpe replied, " I was 1
an action brought against him in the County not bound to interpret the law to you, Sir. It is aI to the Bishop, but the let'er to the secretary of the
Court before Mr. Cooke, in which a judgment desecration of the house of God." And said, pointing i Augmentation Fund was evidence of malice, as show'
was given against him for £5. This sum he re- ing the spirit in which Mr. Kempe had written and
l I
cod,"
lady then present, " At all events it wildo her no
d," adding "It is a desecration of the house of acted. Mr. Kempe prefessed that it was his duty to
fused to pay, and, acting as he said under the ad- to t
vice of his brother, he did not appear vs-hen sum- &id. It is a' degradation of the sacred office." Mr. write to the Bishop of Winchester, but it was not so,
moned to do so. An order was then made for Macdonnell said: "You are entitled to express your for he was not in the Bishops diocese. If it was his
his commitment, upon which his brother (who is an at- 01 • • . lentitled to x slt's
nnton ,am equally e pre. s mine, duty ae write to the Bigler, on the subject it would be
torney) waited upon the Judge to represent that the ' a privileged communication but the learned Judge
nothing of the kind. I have simply done my duty." l ' • .
plaintiff really had no means, and thatno such evidence The parties then left the church, and Mr. Mactlonnell i li,tul held that it was not so. The object of the de'
had been given of his being poseessed of any property was paid a fee of £lO. After this Mr. Randolph, the f -ndaut was really to films Mr. Macdonnell. Com-
as would justify the order. To this Mr. Coo plaintiff's vicar, showed him. a letter from the Ilisho& Cooke replied mentang on the concluding passage in the letter,
that the witness was slicing proof to the contrary, and enclositig him one from Mr. Kempe. This letter of 1% : he said he was surprised to find the learned Judge
attorney Kempe was the libel complained of. It ran thug -- thought it was no libel. Mr. Kempe must have
that be always considered an appearance by an
:39 quite sufficient proof of means. The witness then • • known the Bishop's views on the subject, and h
explained that he was the plaintiff's brother, and acted " St. James's Rectory, Piccadilly, W., Jan. 29, 1072. written the letter to induce him to turn this poor The following causes have been tried at Wells assizes:—
our lord- clergyman adrift upon the world without prospects
gratuitouely, to which Mr. Cooke's reply was to the a '.' al y dear Lord Bishop—lt lamp to call y NORRIS r. BURNETT.
effect that that was very unprofessional. Subsequently soup s attention e the fo and without hope in the future. Such was the con-
the ease was adjourned for a month, and the plaintiff " A few days since a clergyman officiating in your lord- duct pursued by this wealthy incumbent inspired by This was an action for breach of promise of marriage.
was summoned to show cause why he should note corn- ship's diocese,a Mr. Macdonnell, called upon sic, and repre-
i' if tii
gent ng himself as e curate of an acquaintance of mine, a
nutted for contempt of Court. The plaintiff then clergyman whose name alone was a passport to my emit- with this Mr. Kempe wrote not only to the poor the time of making the alleged agreement he was so in-
this odious theological spirit of hatred. te''ot satisfied The defendant, among other pleas, had pleaded that at
appeared, but refused tobe sworn, and wag ordered to be denee, Mr.- toxicated that be Was unable to comprehend the mean-
L. Randolph, of Lower Norwood, asked permis- crate's
temployter,thine osrderretatoxydeopfrityehAixm of
ehnietatiemo
, impriscred in Notwl• ji Castle for ''.o der for contempt illen to selemuise a marriage In my church. Thrown off my Enoymen t, but ..0
deprive
_ ~ . e
ed.
„td
nicl
of Cant, but the warrant when made out recited non- I inland by the use thus mado on his incumbenst'a name. Itdid 1 F nd, in order to him i?it the The plaMtiff
. ing or effect of the agreement.
is the chtughtei et a person who Im-
minent 38 the ground. and not eon • tempt of comt i not Inquire who were tb, rarefies .5 the, m res.. Itn at Y •
once gnuttest his reemess. stab ' main, malicious name and where she lived with her fathe:
While in the Carta(' lAe plaintiff received from hie ' „ .. received lion that source. This, also, w,
wreee prof Peed]. i merly kept an inn at Otterford, whMh was now in los
; done from i serum of " duty."
Tue teeming
brother • notice of aetden to be served on Mr. Cooke . . , e,. -
I try end toe teenee aus pro ace , i appea.e.that ,
1.. d. il . t - I the ' - ' ''h' F thevidence ef the plaintiff it. appea
this notice he served in person the day, after his libera- ' woman had been divorced on the petition ot her Imahand, so .
real truth was diet the defendant had gvatahea is From Et
whys its Psrases awes." elm' to mf I actions had been done in the name of " duty " The . mother. The defendant. la e farmer of a:Wee
dicgve feeling He hael succeeded in expelling the that in June last year she met the defendant whom
tion. Mr. Cooke was et the " King s Head" Hotel, that the marriage promoted was one of the•.e in the way Ot
North Waltham, holding his mutt in the long room, Which I have revolved to throw every possible impediment, plant Icons s emery
appropriated to eardplayers, and, having occasion to and hitherto i have done as with seems. Mr Macdon- 1 Chard, and the defendant then told her that he had
etiff I hi. and in depiriiving •11. im of ell I the had known for some time, at the market at
hope of employment in the Ch
her. He renewed his offer shortly afterwards,
leave the court for a few minutes, was intercepted by "My permission, however, had teeLobitaa,,inoetd,t?,.endealsedliol ne1.11.71 married man, and his only hope was in the been taken with her twelve yearn ago, and wished to
y and their verdict depended marry
the plaintiff in the anteroom or lobby of the court.
ennoctotuteealgsettiteitntltyevemh,gdert about t
vied Vice fututreelejser• ' d upon
prospects fd euggesting marriage in August, and was accepted by
According to the plaintiff's account he went up to Mr. t Mr. Alacdomiell stated that a, pee an prospec o a meritorious au
her; but he let matters go on to September, when he
Cooke and said, " I beg your pardon, Shave a notice although he was now officiating in the diocese of Winches- hard-working English clergyman. definitely broke off the engagement, sang he was
to serve upon you, Mr. Cooke motioned him away, did not feel sure
ter his latest licence was from the Bishop of London, anti I
married, and had settled
down, and made over every-
that he was not, under these cirzum- Mr. Hawkins commenced his address on behalf of
and said he would not have it, to the plaintiff put it stance' 'entitled to officiate within the diocese-' Indeed, I Mr. Kempe by denouncing the attack made upon\his
thing to his wife. The promise was fully made out by
into his waistcoat fold between his watch-chain and suspect he was, at least to the extent of the office in ques- oonsluct and character as most scandalous, o Ir.
tion. Aceordingly I left him to do as he pleaeed, but with Kempe's character was well known, and ought to the evidence of the plaintiff and other witnesses to
his pocket, whereupon Mr. Cooke seized him 17 both whom the defendant bad mentioned the matter. The
' lli towards the d •
' arms, dragged him e door, saying ' Come the strongest protest and the most solemn warning tor winch
f intoxication was entirely negatived and no
plea o ,
into court and I will commit you for contempt." Mr. I could find words. I have now nothing left but to lay the have protected him from such accusations as " vin-
e f witnesses were called for the defendant.
Cooke then, when the plaintiff resisted, gave him into of most unjustlfiable concealment. By the act of one who tamed that in substance the letter to the Bishop o
matter before your lordship. It is, in my view, a gross case dictive malice" and ' sacerdotal tyranny." He main-.
The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for EEO.
the custody of the bailiff, and 20 minutes afterwards must nave known what he was doing I have been betrayed to Winchester, which was complained of as a libel, Wag
undoubtedly true ; and that, therefore, the defendant emithains V. WOOL/BERN%
ordered his release. This was the assault complained allows desecration of my church and altar, from which Ileacd
of. The plaintiff, in addition to his own evidence, so firmly resolved to do all that lay in my poweritoipr 1
B.
was entitled to the verdict. The learned Judge Mr. T. W. Saunders was for the plaintiff, and Mr.
them.—i am, my dear Lord Bishop, yours faith 111 y, .. ~
called in supported his cam his brother the attorney, had not even held that it was a libel at all ; he
Ream. Coiling for the defendant.
another brother named Arthur, and a spectator named ehad only hell that the question whether it was so The plaintiff, who had considerable personal attrac-
Youngman, who partially corroborated the plaintiff's The Lord Bishop of Winchester"
The Bishop thereon wrote to the plaintiff in these the daughter of a farm labourer, her mother
tains, is e , .
story. The learned counsel for the defence, at the terms c___ himself had read the letter sentence by sentence,
or not was for the jury. Indeed the learned Judge - .
close of the plaintiff's cane, submitted that there was „Res, sir
_Von are under „0 general inhibition, but with-
and declared it true, and pronounced it, in his Opinion,
to a young man named Goldsworthy, who was killed
no case to go to the jury, inasmuch as Mr. Cooke was in my o'svn diocese i cannot allow you to officiate as cents no libel at all. All the statements of fact an i being mistress of the parish school. She wax engaged
in February last in a railway accident. Within
acting within his jurisdiction, and that, there- f d this defendant rte letter of
a very few days isw ei a
fore, uo action would lie on the first and third faithfully, "S. WINTON, opinion on undoubted facts. AR to the alleged slander,
after your conduct at St. James's.—" Believe me yours were true, and the rest was the mere expression of
consolation, and sent hie photog,raph, saying he
counts; as to the assault laid in the second count "Rev. G. Macdonnell." the learned Judge had held that there was no case; should like to come and see her, and that he should
he contended that in the theory of law the .Tudge The Bishop wrote to Mr. Randolph :
and that being no, there was no reason for calling Mr.
like to join partneeshie with her. After a letter or
•
WAS still in court, and acting in bin judicial cm ,
"I have tosday only received Mr, iSempe's letter. It con. Kempe as a witness ; there being no matter of fact . g
in two he came over on a Sunday, and they went to church
dispute at all. He had been taunted with not cal m
pacity. Counsel on both sales having been heard.
and several statutes and cases having been cited in sup- re
hates so serious a charge against Mr. Macdonnell that I mnst
quire him to do no further duty in this diocese until he has Mr. Kempe to show his motives in writing the lettl together and walked about; several other letters
. paesed, but the parties only met mice again. At this
port of their respective aatentions, among others, 9 cleared himself from the charge. Will you kindly convey But the truth was, that his case rested on factaa -
time the defendant was engaged to be married, and
.
and 10 Victoria, secs. 113 to 138, 19 and 20 Victoria, this information to hint and read to torn Mr. 6 thine's mitted by the plaintiff himself in cross-examitiation.
32 and 33 Victoria, and "Doswell a Impey" 1, B. acid otters, "Ever affectionately yours, S. WINToN." Nei doubt Mr. Kempe had felt indignant that a mar-
was married on Whit-Mundae The death of (iolds-
C.), and "Scott es Stansfield "(A R., 3, Ex., 220), After this Mr. Randolph dismissed the plaintiff from riage should he celebrated in his church againsthis will, worthy, the intermediate matters, and the issuing of
his Lordship intimated that he should adjourn his de- his curacy, and he had, he said, been unable ever since As to what had been suggested to have been said in Con-
self is a young man just out of his apprenticeship, and
the writ occurred in six weeks. The clef talent him-
chain upon the law of the ease until the morrow, to obtains curacy elsewhere, although he had applied to vocation, it was unjustifiable to BUggeit that anything
earning 12s. a week.
Accordingly, the next day, at the sitting of the Court, various clergymen for employment. Mr. Kempe slanderous bad been said in Convocation. Noth .2, ,
Mr. Collins, for the defence, ridiculed the idea of
the learned Judge, having pointed out that the plait, also wrote to the secretary of the Curates' Augmenta- could be slanderous would be allowed to be said in ( on-
, ; and asked how the jury were to estimate the money
tiff's case consisted of two pasta—the first and tion Fund, drawing his attention to the matter. This vocation ; nothing that could reflect upon pereonal I there being any hasty to the feelings of the plaintiff,
shit d cutlet, relating to what passed in court, and action was then brought against Mr. Kempe, for emu- character; and there was not a particle of prOei io
e ted thatwhat the defendant had meant was, not
the second to the scene in the ante-room—Proceeded pensatiou for the Mien, it was alleged he caused to el le anything of the kind. Be meerted that everything in value of the loss to her of this marriage. He also
to rule as follows :—That, as to the fired part of the Macdoinell, and the action was in the form of an the letter complained of as the - ' that he would marry a girl he had only seen once
plaintiff's case, no action would lie against a Judge for action for slander and libel, to which the defendant set aue, and proved to be true by the evidence already
before, but that they should gee if they suited one
anythieg done by him in court within his jurisdiction, I up a justification. There were three counts in the given in the case. Strong language had been used onlay
a another.
though in point of fact erroneous or even malicious. I declaration, two for slander, on account of the worde in order to eke out tbe weakness .of the ease.;
libel was substantially suggested
As to the sermnd part, thatan action would liefor what spoken at the church, and a third for libel, the alleged kinds of irrelevant topics had been brought in esseidth a , The learned Judge, in summing up, declared the
was done in court by him not in his character of a libel being in the letter to the Bishop of Winchester. view to excite prejudice. Mn. Kempe'is expression action was a caricature, and the jury iiltimately re-
Judge. lii, Lordship added that as the case was of The defendant pleaded "Nat Guilty," a denial of the that the marriage would "do the bride no good" had turned a verdict for the defendant
great importance each side thould have leave to move, malice alleged in an action for libel, as well as a plea been much dwelt upon, but that was said, in the sense . .....---
but that to prevent the possibility of a new trial he - of justification. that he believed the marriage illegal. The question -
should ask the jury to find what damages they would I Mr. Serjeaut Parry and Mr. F. J. Lewis were for --
give in each case. The defendanta counsel then oh' ; the plaintiff' Mr. Hawkine, leC.. and Mr. F. M. rey and some of the I
in common with many of the etc ~, . . ,
was, not whether Mr. Kempe was right or wrong ; but, j
jected that there was no notice of action' but, as this 1 White were kr the defendant. Bishops, he believed that these marriages were invalid On Saturday afternoon Lord Shaftesthury laid the
objection stood or fell with the other, the case pro. ! land could .
1 The Bishop of Winchester had been subp mead as a
ceeded. them valid. It was well knewn that before
by the law of God, and that the law of the
not make . Fwhich b been
called the Shaftesbury I ark estate, as
. and it was said was in attendance but in
..... witness„ , , , first stone upon an estate at Wandsworth, near London,
the Divorce Act, in special Divorce Acts there acquired by the Artisans, Labourer's., and General
For the defence, the Registrar of the Court the hewn consequence of some arrangement between counsel to
and Mr. Cooke himself were called, and all gave a very dispense with his Lordship's attendance be wan not was always a proviso introduced tliat the parties Dwellings Company (Limited), is said to be laid out
different version of the scene in the lobby. Mr. I 'poke, it called. divorced aheuld not intermarry, although, no doubt, as a workmana city in 1,200 dwelling'. The cempany
appeared, attired in his wig and gown, was passing The court was crowded with clergymen and others the clause was always etnick out in the Lerds. And was formed in 1667, in consequence of the destruction
through the anteroom, when he was stopped by a heavy interested, when the Legislature passed the Divorce Act in 1857 of hoives by railroads and other improvements, ter
hand laid ripen hisehoulder, while at the same time some- After the pleadings had been opened, they no far recognised and respected the conscientious
1 thing was tbrugt between his arm and his side. Mr. Mr. Serjeant Parry opened the case to the jury, re. Scruples of the clergy that they provided that no clergy- inge combining fitness and economy with the latest
Cooke like Mr. Nupkins was a public man—he had be-
,-• ,- • presenting it an one of great importance, not only to the d 11 Icelebrateh • • 'improvements, Ito tesexime themselves the
man should he compe ee to such a marriage, sanitary ant
the purpom of enabling working- men to erect dwell'f
ore his eyesthe f ate cif Julius C wear and Mr. Perceval, or, clergy but to the public at large. He said he believed or be subjected to any suit or censure for refusing to owners of these dwellings in the course of a stateel
to speak of our own time, of Mr. :lustier Norman and I that by the law the incumbent could not refuse his c
di, so. It was . , true that the incumbent objecting to number of years by the payment of a small ablitional
Lord Mayo, but, unlike Mr. Nupkins, he did not turn / consent to the use of his church fer the purpose of such rent. On every estate purchased by the company a sui
celebrate the marriage Uots.bound tu
.permit any other s b th • 't-
clergymen entitled to officiate within the theiceee to able space will be reserved as a recreation-ground, a co-
pale—he only turned round and collared his mane a marriage, but if he could it was inexcusable to pre-
dragged him to the door and gave him in charge to the tend that Mr. Macdounell had obtained his ceneeut - -e it' ' operative store will be built for the special benefit of
bailif , mail, having recognized the feature of his as- by any fraudulent concealment. He was a stranger to London, officiate' the diocese f d bli h es will be absolutely for-
the plaintiff was entitledto lll e cese te the tenants, an pu c one
c lebrat
'silent and seen by the termer what his errand was, he ar. Kemp°, and had no knowledge of him peculiar views
ordered him to be set at liberty. Mr. Cooke's account on the subject. Mr. Kempe, no doubt, was entitled to la Bra pof thedioosee, which was to be granted The Shaftasb Park YAW& oontaine about forty
The 48th canon required a written licenee bidden.
from
the
esuls°,i d the plaintiff had long ceased •id wited between tit NV daworth-road
was corroborated in all important particulars by the his views on the subject; though, if they were eon. for a part cure ;an _ . sores, and is tua *en •an
evidence of the other witneesee. •
scientions, they appeared to be bigoted. ut be had to belong to the for which be bad been and the South-Weetern Railway, and about half•way
licensed, and he had never had a lioenos in the between the Wandsworth-road and the Clapham
The learned Judge then summed up the case to the tried in every possible way to Injure Mn, Macdonnell, di of Winchester. The point, however, was not as Junction Stations; and a new station on the London,
jury, and divided it into two parts—what was done in and had succeeded in ruining him. He had written t o , but London ; not asto Norwood, but Chatham, and Dover Railway forms part of the archi-
court and what out of court On the first part, Wm. the Bishop of Winchester and had induced him tto Winchestero ord to
prisiog the first and third counts, he directed a verdict inhibit Mn, Macdonnell from acting in his diocese,
an Th affd
St. James's. e point was whether the plaintiff was tect'a design for the future buildings, so an to
entitled legally to officiate in the parish of St. James's the inhabitanta of the projected " city " all necessary
for the defendant, subject to the leave to move as the result of this Was that no other Bishop. would
in the diocese of London, and whether he was entitled facilities for going to and returning from their labour.
above ; but on the other part, the scond count, he license him. Mr. Kempe had threatened to bring the
to claim to celebrate the maniage. The houses are to be thoroughly drained, constructed
directed the jury that there was a case for them, and matter before Convocation, and, if he had done go, no
that they were to estimate the damages accordingly, doubt it was in the exercise of his right as a member . .. _ The learne Judge t thought tt a e was not mate-
Th d hh h t thi on sound principles and with good materialg, and well
The jury found for the plaintiff, damages one far- of Convocation. But whatever he had done he had nal, as the plaintiff was a clergyma nin holy orders, !implied with water. Ample school accommodation
thing, and returned that they found a verdict for the undoubted] ruined the plaintiff. It appeared that and was permitted to officiate as such, will be provided, and a ball for lectures or public
Y hiid t on this above th
like amount on the other counts in case it should be Mr. Kempe pet himself, _ subject,,Mr. Hawkine said be dwelt upon the matter as mate- meetings will be built. The houses are to be of three
e Hal to the question of the bond tides of Mr. Kempe. kinds, for the accommodation not only of artisans, but
Legislature and above the law. it was a piece of
necessary to ask them. M B Martin 'd the al defect of the came of also of the "clerk clam ;" and each house is to form a
Mr. . aeon said re . .
sacerdotal tyranny on his part which no jury would
approve, and the plaintiff appealed to them for their ? distinct d separate tenancy, fitted with every sanitary
the hunt& upon that point was that his right to per-an separa nancy,
form the ceremony only arose on the refusal of the and domestic convenience.
verdict m a ruined man.
The plaintiff was called and examined as a witness, incumbent to do so ; and the fact was that Mr. Kempe At the appointed time on Saturday a large concourse
and stated the principal facts substantially as above re- had never been &eked to do so. of people had assembled to witness the ceremony of
bated; only he deecribed Mr. Kempe as "fearfully Hi. Hawkinseaid thatwag what heintendedtocontend laying the first or " memorial" stone. Lord Shaft's-
excited." In hie cross examination by Mn, Hawkins he in the next place. First, he said that Mr. Kempe had honey arrived punctually at the time appointed, and
admitted that a great many of the clergy and some of the conscientious scruples to celebrate such marriages, end Mr. Walton, the chairnaul of the company, Opened

_
to Bishop Mackenzie at the Cape as the same. Besides. I
feared that by lurtherexpolole in the rains the weakness might
result in something worse. I went seven days south-
west, or a little backwards, to a camp formed by the
head men of the ivory, le .rile, and on the 7th February went
into winter quarttrs. I found these men as civil and kind as

. _
Bishops entertained a strong objection to such mar-
rlagee, an objection founded upon a persuasion that
were
.R.laßoutely prohibited by Scripture. The
-.. he' entertained'

thathe had never been asked to celebrate the mini-
age and, had never refused to do 80. Therefore, the
plaintiff had never acquired a legal right to celebrate
the marriage in Mr. Kempe's church, even assuming
that he was legally entitled to officiate in the diocese at
all. Next Air. Kempe's consent had been given upon the
simple statement that Mr. Macionnell was the curate of
Mr. Randolph, without further inquiry on his part, and
with an entire concealment of the position of the parties.
Mr. admitted that if he had been asked to
celebrate a between parties in such a position
without being mrormed of it he should have felt in-
dignant ; and so Mr. Kempe bad a right to feel in-
dignant at the use of his church for the purpose without
his being informed of it. The information had been
withheld from him to which he hail a right—a moral
and legal right ; for by the Act of Parliament he was
entitled to give a refusal, and it was only upon such
a refusal the plaintiffs right to celebrate the mar-
riage in that church could arise. That being
so, if a marriage had been celebrat.d which Mr.
Kempe thought invalid and illegal, he had a right, and
it was his duty, to communicate the matter to the
Bishop, and he contended that every statement in the
letter was substantially true. The facto were truly
stated, and the Bishop of Winchester was not the man
to be misled by an erroneous inference from the facts,
even assuming that Mr. Kempe had drawn any in-
ference that was erroneous. He denied that the letter
was a libel at all, and even if it was, he maintained
that it was substantially true, and that therefore Mr.
Kempe was entitled to the verdict.
The learned Judge then summed up the case to the
jury. He still continued, he said, to think that if
two persons got into an altercation upon a matter
in dispute between them, and one of them used
strong language to the other on the subject, it was
not a malicious speaking, and not the subject of
an action of slander. He therefore directed them
to dismiss from their consideration the counts for
slander, and to confine their attention to the count for
libel—the libel contained in the letter. As to this,
there was a great difference between the statement of
a defamatory charge and the statement of facts which
were true, with the expression of the writer's opinion
upon these facts, lie very much doubted whether
such a letter was a libel at all. Under Mr. Fox's Act
however, in criminal eases the question of libel was for
the jury, and the practice had ever since been the same
in civil actions. The course was for the Judge to ex-
press his opinion upon the document, but not as a matter
of law. In this awe, however, he should express no
opinion, and should leave the question to the jury.
When the Divorce Act passed there were very strong
views entertained on the subject, and many persons
were of opinion that it was wrong to allow adulterers
to intermarry. That was urged with great force on
the Legislature, and by none with greater force than
the present Premier. The Act passed, however, per-
mitting such marriages, but providingthat 110 clergyman
should be compelled to celebrate them. Then came
the further proviso that when a clergyman refused to
celebrate such a marriage any other might celebrate it
in his church. This required that the incumbent
should be informed on the matter, and asked to cele-
brate the marriage in his church, and it was only upon
his refusal to do so that any other clergyman could do
it in the incumbent's church. This had been over-
looked, and without imputing to the plaintiff any im-
proper motive, he had certainly not disclosed the
matter to Mr. Kempe, who had given his assent in
entire ignorance on tile subject. o doubt he became
iery angry when he discovered the fact, and, whether
he was right or wrong, he was entitled to his
opinion. Thereupon he declared that he should
communicate the matter to the Bishop, and then
came the letter complained of, as to which there were
two questions —W aa It a libel, and, if so, was it true?
Perhaps Mr. Kempe was wrong in thinking it his duty
to write to the Bishop of Winchester, but if the letter
was not a libel, or was true, that was not material.
The learned Judge then went through the letter sen-
tence by sentence, pointing out that there was nothing
libellous or untrue in it down to the last sentenze.
The learned Judge intimated it as his opinion that
the plaintiff having once been licensed in the diocese
of London, and the licence not having been revoked,
he was 'entitled to officiate" in that diocese. No
doubt at the close of the letter Mr. Kempe pro-
nounced it a "gross cam of unjustifiable conceal-
ment." But that was merely his comment upon facts
truly set forth. And the question wil.Fs, whether he was
not entitled to express his opinion, and whether that
was a libel. Was the use of the word " betrayed "
such as to amount to a libel? As to the word de-
secration " it only indicated Mr. Kempe's conscientious
opinion. On the whole, was tnere in the letter any libel?
plaintiff himself admitted that the incumbent who
hail to celebrate the marliage ought to have been in-
formed of the relations of the parties, and that if not
informed of it he might naturally hate been very in
dignant. That being the plaintiff a own opinion, why
hail it not occurred to him that possibly Mr. Kempe,
in whose church the ceremony was to be performed,
might have bad a 'similar feeling, and why hail he
not disclosed the truth to Mr. Kempe? It war for
the jury to say whether, under these circumstances,
Mr. Kempe's expression of opinion was or was not
justified? If so, then he would in any view of the letter
be entitled to the verdict; and so, if they thought it no
libel. If otherwise then they would had for the plaintiff,
with such damages as they might think him entitled
to. As to damage the only evidence adduced was as
to the inhibition of the Bishop of Winchester. But
as to this, it was obvious, from 'his known opinions on
the subject, that he would have taken that step main
the facts of the case so soon as they became known
to him. It was for the jury to consider whether
the Bishop's decision was not upon the facts as
they were truly stated by Mr. Kempe, and, if so,
then Mr. Kempe would not be responsible for the in-
hibition, for it would be the result of the Bishop's
own judgment on the facts. If they thought that the
Bishop would have acted on his own judgment on
the facts, then the defendant was not responsible for
the Bishop's act. Arts any other damage, none other
was alleged and proved ill this aut. . On the oriole,
the jury must say if they found for the plaintiff, and if
so for what damages.
The jury, after some consideration, found a verdict
for the deiendant, the Foreman stating that some of
them thought the letter was no libel.
The learned Baron said he was disposed to be of
their opinion; only Baron Bramwell had thought other-
wise.
Verdict for the defendant.
The case lasted all day to four o'clock, and excited
great interest in a crowded court.

I could wish:
After the rains, which continued into July, Living-
stone lost no time in preparing to follow the river; but
he found great difficulty in getting people to go on,
being "at the mercy of those who had been Moslem
slaves, and knew that in thwarting him they had the
sympathy of all that class in the country." lie went
on, however, with only three attendants, north-west, in
ignorance that the great river flows west and by south.
Abroad be 3 of bugs or prairie lies along the tight bank ,
Inland from this it is all ptimeval forest, with villages iron,
tight to ten miles apart Ona sees the son o.•ly in the cleared
Spaces around human dwellings. From the heilities for
emiaping to the forest, people are wilder and more dangerous
than those on the buga lands.
klithamad's people went further on In the forest than I
COlll4l ti Came to the mountainous c mutt), of the
who collect° I in large 'aloha', and demanded of the
strangers why they came. "We came to buy ivory," Was the
reply "anti if you have Inman° harm is done: we shall re-
turn." "Nay." they shouted, "yin came to use, sad this
.'sty is your last : you came to die—you Came to die" When
forced to fire on the flalegga, the terror was like their in-
solence —extreme. And next day, when sent or to take
away the women and children who were captured, no one
appeared.
'laving travelled with by informants, I knew their Sc
count, to be trustworthy. The rivers crossed by them are
numerous and large. One watt so tortuous they were five
hours lathe water, wain and often neck deep, with a man
in a small canoe sounding for places which they could pans.
In another case they were two hours lit the water, and they
could are nothing in the forest, and nothing iti the Balegga
country but one mountain packed closely to the back of
another, without end, and a very hot fountain in one of the
valleys.
By continual wading in mud, Livingstone says, for
the brat time in his life his feet failed him ; and as
nothing was to be gained by going further in that
direction, be "limped back" to Bambarre, where
he was had up by the eating nlvers many months.
He explains that, failing to obtain other men at
Irjiji for those who played him f aloe at Dam-
berme, he might have waited in comfort for
those for whom he had written to the coast,
but for his suspicion that the Arab Governor at
Lnyanyembe—who "seems to be naturally an
conditioned mortal, a hater of the English," and
who bad formerly plundered some of Livingstone's
goods—would stop or destroy his letters; and the sus-
picion proved correct. Compelled to inactivity for
many months, the Doctor offered 1,000 dole, to
some of the traders for the loan of ten of
their men; but their cupidity had been In-
flamed by the discovery of new and im-
mense deposits of ivory, and the offer was in
vain. The letter ends with some remarks on the
Manyuema, of whom Livingstone speaks highly. Ile
lived "in what might be called the Tipperary of
Manyema, and they are certainly a bloody people
among themselves; " but they are far finer and hand-
somer than the negroes on the coast, and the charge of
cannibalism is "not proven" against them.

Mcdonnel

.uaa7i!lge

The second letter, "to the Earl of Clarendon" is
dated " Ujiji, November 1, 1871." It begins :
I became aware of Mr. Young's Search Expedition only. in
February last, and that by a private letter from Sir Roderick
Murchison. Though late to expressing my thankfulness,
am not the less sincere In now saying that I feel extremely
obliged to her Majesty's Government, to the Admiralty, to
Captain Richards, to Sir Roderick Murchison, to Mr. Young,
and all concerned in promoting tile kind and rigorous in-
ljuiry after my fate. Rad the low tone of morality among
the East African Idahometans been known, Musa's tale
would have received but little attention. Musa Is perhaps a
shade better than the average low class Moslem, but all are
notorious for falsehood and heartlessness.
Some stories illustrating Musa's heartlessness are
told ; instances are cited of the dishonesty, cowardice,
and general worthlessness of the "low-caste Moslem,"
from having whom in his journey all his difficulties
had arisen; and he does not spare the better class,
of whom "few can be trusted," and compared
with whom "the English lower classes are gen-
tlemen." Under the same date is another and
much longer despatch to Lord Clarendon, &tail-
ing his discoveries and his defeat. Ile "had just
come off a tramp of more than 400 miles beneath a
vertical torrid sun, jaded in body and mind by being
forced back by faithless cowardly atendants.
[Our limited space precludes us from giving more of
the Doctor's interesting despatches.] The concluding
despatch of the series, written from ' linyanyembe, the
Kazeh cf Speke, Feb. 20, 1872," and addressed to Lord
Granville, draws attention at g, eat length and in
earnest terms to "the part which the Banians of Zanzi-
bar, who are protected British subjects, play in carrying
on the slave trade in Central Afriel, and especially in
Manyuema, the country west of Ujiji ; together with
a proposition which I have very much at beart—the
possibility of encouraging the native Christians of
English settlements on the West Coast of Africa to
remove, by voluntary emigration, to a healthy spot on
this side the Continent."

Pending the occurrence of a threatened earthquake a
South American paterfamilias sent his boys to stay with a
friend beyond the limits of the fated section. The convul-
sion dbl not torn np when due, hut the youngsters remained
in their piece of safety till the following note from the boat
procured their recall :—" Dear P.--Send the earthquake
along here, and take home your boys,"

h4a.
apperred
lant, wi
market