The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1874-10-06 00:00:00

BBAKINSTER.

COl'Str e rr SitaasoN_a, 31:_onda_y:LI:eluru Col. Cox (chair.
man), and Captain Rumen.

BRTTIRD AT LARY.

....As A.
The Ganslinos of fleantinsfre 11 ' v. John Pone.--Mr
This mar hal beet. re.uaude'l Iris. time to time for iai,,u.
rsaaoss, but it teas undor,sto.ol tl,,t ii., furtbor remand would
prepared to prove the marriage of defend mit too Elisabeth fleet
Taylor, at Malian, in 1137 ; that his wife bail entered the
workhouse on the 14th February last, and that on the 25th
February she had given birth to • child ; also that defendant
had beau seen with his wife at • reasonable time before the
birth of the child. Defendant was indebted to the Union for the
nthintenarim of his wife for 30 weelth at 2s &l, and the child 25
wee.. attle ; total £7 to, and it was this sum the guardians
now sought to recover. If he provol what he indicated,he thought
the maghthates would have but little difficulty in earning to •
Mi U. Cox, clerk to the Guardians proved receiving
etb_e c'Lliac•Lt pr,duc.l of the marriage of defendant in 1817,
. m the clergyman at Pilielon on the 14th July lad, in con-
at' aqdinj.,s, be had ,no,I to him-Mary llallett,
* "w '4 bl',kv Abte4t, said sire knew the defendant perfectly
when they were married it the it... Mr I ustable ; she could
not remember the year, lout it aoa the 14th .f May in the saute
living at Drimptam, fled defendant's wife WAS living in service
at Mr. Morton's •ttketime;thiswu in the middle of August
in t "r toil ,
that time she en. .Jcfendant on two
separate ....casinos with his cite ; she saw them once in a
mangei field, avail member time under • hayrick. She mho:
qb:!:::ti'dY•i:;.kg"dwithj"h" (defm.iao,ti it "You hero
Somh LOU% then ;" arol defendant
had
replied. Yes, and I shall go agalia if 1 like."-Witnees aU
severely enes.examlnual by err. Jolliet, but he failed to shako
her ll:1,11.1011% OH any material point.; she said she had never
seen defendant • wife with other 111011, nor had she been! her
spoken ill of. -he latiew they had been living monist. tor
No= time: she had never heard any quarrels between them,
although she had heard that they did arnarrel sometimes. -
George rune, Neither of defemitht. said lac knew Mrs. rose;
he was not present at the marriage although he was In the
church when the wedding took 'Mee - (laughter). Ile saw the
contracting 'artless sign their neut., and he believed he put his
crow against It. He did not lams a hat her naine aas before
the was married, but he believed the wedding took place some
Wren or eight years ago. -Croft-examined be Mr. Jollide,
witness said his brother and his wife had lived together for
Some little time after their marriage, ands child had been born ;
but for some years they had lived awe his brother maintain-
ing the thild ; the wife ran her husband into debt, gut rid of
his goods, they quarrelled and then armed to separate. For
some six months up to July of last year defendant had been
Hying at Burton BrailetoM, he had never seen defendant and
his wife together since they parted, nor hal he ever seen the
wife in company with other men. -Mr Thomas Woalton,
master of the Bearninster union workhouse, mid the • ife was
admitted into the house on the 14th February last: and 011 the
2 th she gave birth to a child; since that time the nether and
child had been chargeable to the Union, and the defendant
owed £7 Is for their inainteuancv. ale did not know thyteing
of Mrs lone till she was admitted to the workhouse -Thls
was the whole of the e' levee for the pneecution.-Mr
fed the defence, said this was a case of very serious moment to
his client, for he was Ladled meml,, niaintaln a child which
was not his own, and • women that had committed adultery, as
be was prepared, be peeve :the woman had, therefore, forfeited
all claims on her husband's support_ They had been married
some six or elOt years, and um child had been born, which
the husband had no grounds to say was not his, and which he
therefore maintained. His wife was an evil woman, she
gut rid of his furniture, the incurred debts, and
at last an arrangement was made by which they semnded.
The witness Hallett had told the nem diabolical fahiesis
that ever mine out of a human inouth, and he certainly
believed that there was a,, underethediug between the wife and
the old woman, by the way in which she attempted to describe
what she said she had seen. Sc-, he should prove that the
wife bad been keeping oenieny and associating with other
men; be should also prove that the old woman never mid any-
thing of the kind to his client voncerning that he had been with
his wife es she deeeribed. She hail mid that she saw defendant
with his wife in Auguet ; now the child was born in February
so that what was tried to be made out of that fell to the ground
altogether. The woman had beet, seen in public houses with
various men, drinking, and she had actually been seen at the
tunnel's gate with a young man named Blade between 12 and
one o'clock at night. lie shouki call defendant to deny much
that the erinnan Hallett had said. -Mr Gundry (magistrate's
clerk) said He Jonah could not call the defendant to glee
evidence, as be best committed an act id eagrancy, under the
Clindind Act, and for which he °mkt be imprisoned. -Mr
Jolliffe thought adherwise, hut the Bench ruled against him -
Thomas Font, a yaiunger breather of Um defendant, mid the
defendant and his wife had been separated about three years,
and they had not lived together since His brother had lived
at Barton Bralstock for oilmen: months up to July, Ibid. At
that time his brother's wife lived at Drimpton, but he did not
know mythi rag of her conduct there. -Crease-examined, writhes,
said his brother might hare been away from Burton Braitstock
for anything he knew, as he was living at Marshwood some
part of the time. Ile remembered his brother coming to
Burdock .an one occasion, aimed three months before he mine
home In July ; he came id a Saturday, and went back again on
• Sunday. Saw lib troller's ate at iturstoek Just before she
had the lad child Woe certain his brother did not see his wile
when he sae home. the 04.,7411011 referred to.-James !roughen
said In 1372 he kept the larimptian tunapike gate, alter that he
kept the tunnel gate ; on the first miming of 1373, about one
o'clock at iihthe defendant's wife was at the tunnel gate In
company with young Mr Altic : they Callie in together, and
they went away ti.gether ; aftersanls when at Drimpton, he
heard ddeliciant's rife my she had not 110011 her husband fur 18
months. Mr Gundry said hear nary, idenet emlii not be
received. -Mr Jodi& maintained this ciuld in ; but the Bench
refused to some It. - Witness, en...qr./Wind by Mr. Manley,
said defendant's wife tame Lip to the tuned gate on bueinisa
Young blade au a lad of about 16 now : se that he- must then
have been about 14 ; lau certainly thought It improper for a
married women to eau: at such a time of the night with • I.y
of 14. Ile gas e them a bottle of Omer beer each, bemuse they
were dry, awl Baked for it.-3lrs Lucy Semis said she lived at
liroadelmor. and knew ',ones adv. She at one time heard
her ny—The helieh 'topped aitrrees, and she knew within,
inure.-Mrs Janie Holges, Driinpron, said she knee tone
wik while she lived at !whereon. Had seen her in Chubb'e
public-home driliking with men ; this was ehilst she (Fonee
wife) was at senice at Mr Nortoli.g. She remembered g.ing silk
wik; Into a public heuse where he coo and he afterwards
left the public-11mm: and went on a It h thetas, as his ned lay the
mow war. She thought it an, about loot Chrietnias this tech
'lam; she then appeared to he in the family way. She had
eeera Fon..s wife on i0n..... 0,...,4,114 with young Ines, but
had 1.11,4:f •04.11 hA:r with wink all, hot 1.4,11 a yoUlig man with
his artli around ileferelant's not, Cross-twinned by Mr
Manley, witness said deklitilalle% a Be ••114X stayed at her MAW
three 'lays; and Form e came to the house 4.11 one ....•1011, just
before Christmas, and they had nem eider ell together. She
did not know who laid for it, Ifilt rule beard Fidie ask his wife
if she had any inetice. She bad eftera Inem into a publiehome
in company with Mrs Fame.- ke-manained, witness said lone
did not know his wife wth at her homer when ha-called on the
timasion referred to. In slower to the Minch she wnAl Vice
mired his wife for trivet- to pay bar the eider ; she denary he
was hr the hoe-.e with his ads- and her for abeut an hour.-
Mee Mary Stonily, said elle had often seen defendant's wife
talking to young men, but hail never emu her at public-homes,
nor veer seen her In ei emend with lie r 'Burdened. -Crum-examined:
She never saw anything beiween her and any young
men.-Me Joni& said this WWI all the e, ide 1110: he was allowed
to produce; Mr Guidry 11441 mid the cleaner &genet his client
was of a criminal character, then-fore it a-es for the priesecu-
Unri to prove every tact conchuively, or the defendant must
have the benefit of the doubt; nee, he maintained that the
defendant had never been aided to onatribute towards his
Wile's support, they bad leen living alert, and how was he to
know the state his • ile .411 in They mutat show that defendant
was in • position to uraiiitain his elk, and that he laad referred
to do pO.-Mr Manley said he anticipated everything had been
done that %Vas neevaaary ; but Mr Joni& thought otherwise.--
The Court here adjeurned for five minute., and on its
re-assembling, the Chairman mid they had gie en the came their
consideration, and they had come to the conclusion that as the
prieseutlon had failed to Dhow that deferadant was In a position
to maintain his wife, the charge must fall to the 'trowel. Hid
such been proved to have been the case, the verdict would have
beet' decidedly against the de/textual