The Express.
London, England, 1864-12-16 00:00:00

THE EXTRAORDINAAY LIBEL CASE AT

DUBLIN.

rearnmAy's nocennsos.

Yesterday Mr. Travers (father of the plaintiff)
proved the receipt of the letter containing the alleged libel.
The plaintiff was not cross.examined, and this closed her
case.
Serjeant Sullivan then nee to state the ease for the de-
fendants. He said—Gentlemen of the jury, I assure you I
rout° stets a case more profoundly impressed with a
deep sense of duty than I do at this moment. Gentlemen, I
very much fear, from the manner in which this case has
been opened, and from the mode in which it has been
conducted, that your minds have been drawn away
from the real question that you have to try, and it
will be necessary that mob of you should restore himself
to a state of calm judgment before you can come to a
conclusion on the matters submitted to you here. This
is an action brought against Sir William Wilde and his
wife, founded on no act of his, founded on no course of
conduct which be pursued or is alleged to have taken,
founded on nothing be ever said of the plaintiff or did to
her ; it is an action founded on a letter written by his wife,
for which by our law he is responsible, but for the writing
of which, in fact, he is no more responsible or answerable
than any one of you that I now have the honour of address-
ing—for a letter that was written without his knowledge—
without consulting him—and after Lady Wilde had received
the grossest insults that woman could receive, and the direst
provocations that could be offered. I deeply deplore that
in an action of this kind we have been pursuing an
inquiry totally foreign to what is to be tried, going
into matters that cannot be before you in coming
toe conclusion on tho issue, that will be sent to you to
try, that cannot enter even into a consideration of the
question of damages ; and I take upon myself the reopen.
sibility of saying, at the outset of the case, that I will not
enter on that inquiry. I never was more clear in my opi-
nion that these matters are beside the question you will
have to try, that they cannot be investigated in the manner
they ought to be, having regard to their gravity ; and I
will not allow me clieut to be drawn into an investigation
in an action of this description, and which investigation
has no bearing, directly or indirectly, upon the subject
matter of the trial I know you will, as men of honour
and intelligence, give fair play to both parties here ; that
you will deal with the ease as men of experience and men
of the world ; and that you will not decide against Sir
William Wilde in an action in which the matters to which
I have referred cannot be investigated, and where, to prove
the opposite, would not be evidence to clear him from this
charge, and which, I say, upon the evidence before you, I
will demonstrate to be fabricated. I say there is no neces-
sity for Sir William Wilde to say one word if, on the acts
and conduct of the plaintiff, the evidence she has given, the
document, she has written, and the course of procedure of
which she has been guilty, you cannot, with safety to man,
act on such testimony in a court of justice. My client,
Lady Wilde, has been assailed by my learned friend, Ser-
jeant Armstrong, in terms such its I think ought not to
have fallen from him, and who, surpassing the prurient
suggestions of his client, has charged her with attributing,
in this libel, to Miss Travers prostitution with the news-
piper boys of Bray, whose animal instincts he described in
language that was shocking to hear. Gentlemen, I do say,
with the learned and eminent Lord Chief Justice of England,
when he referred to language used by counsel in a case the
other day—" I have listened with astonishment to your
opening statement. What you are stating now appears to
be for the purpose of vindictive exposure. it i. nothing to
the purpose. I can understand it, however, if your object
is to inflict pain and humiliation on the defendant. The
course you are pursuing is very effective for that purpose.
The question is, has the defendant agreed to pay the plain-
tiff 50!. a year on her giving up the house If he has,
and she has done it, she is entitled to the verdict. I can
understand that. The course you are pursuing is very
effective for that purpose." So say I of the portion of
Serjeant Armstrong's statement which charged Lady
Wilds with " publishing " this letter falsely and ma-
liciously, and insinuating by it that Miss Traver! was
• prostitute with the newspaper boys of Bray—
• statement that shocked the feelings of everyone
who understands the proper interpretation of the English
language. Gentlemen, you will do justice to Miss Travers,
but, at the same time, you will do justice to Lady Wilde—
you will not warp her language from its legitimate meaning
at all events—you will not take her as attributing to Miss
Travers immorality of the grossest and most debasing
character ; and you will confine your attention to the issue
which you have to try. The learned serjeant then proceeded
to call attention to the pleadings. The first three counts of
the summons and plaint charged that Lady Wilde meant
by the letter that the plaintiff asked for money for pros.
tituting her person, and that, io substance, she attributed
to her that she had had criminal intercourse with her
husband. Lady Wilds add on the record that she
never meant to convey that the plaintiff was
making for money for the prostitution of her person. rin
the issues, all the jury would have to try was whether
the interpretation put upon the letter of the plaintiff was
the correct one, or was the interpretation put upon the
words," wages of disgrace," namely, that it was money she
endeavoured to extort by either suppressing a false charge
or not circulating • true one! In the fourth count the
plaintiff set out the libel without any inueodo, and then
Lady Wilde justified it by saying that she wrote it to the
father of the plaintiff, for the purpose of endeavouring to
keep her from the dreadful course she was pursuing,
annoying and insulting her (Lady Wilde), and heaping
infamy oo herself. " Was that truer was the question
the jury would have to answer. As he said before, he
deeply lamented that they had been dragged into an inquiry
that could have no bearing on that question, and that could
not help the jury in coming to a conclusion upon it, That
inquiry, however, revealed this—that Miss Travers
pursued her course for the purpose of maligning and
inflicting pain on Lady Wilds, and in furtherance of
what she early said, thatch, would pay off Lady Wilde
for the imaginary slight put upon her. And now, what
was the tact? Lady Wilde was well known as a literary cha-
racter, and Miss Travers also had some pretensions to
literary attainments. Lady Wilde brought her to her
house, invited her to her table, and had her present at her
reunions. In June, 186', this kindly state of feeling was
abruptly terminated. It appeared that Miss Travers called
one day and asked to see Lady Wilde, who was then en.
gaged with a lady. The servant brought up the message,
but before an answer could be returned, Mir Travers
walked uninvited into the room. Lady Wilde was naturally
annoyed at this, and told Miss Tracers that it was an on.
warractable intrusion. Miss Travers immediately walked
out in a great purlieu, and said, as she was passing
through the hall, that she would be revenged on Lady
Wilde, and she kept her promise to the letter. is October,
1011, a year after the alleged violation, Miss Travers
launches out this tremendous piece of iniquity, the pamph-
let, containing the most awful charges against Sir m.
Wilde, for the purpose of wreaking the full extent of her
vengeance against Lady Wilde. The whole thing was a
couooction. Let them put the statements in the pamphlet
side by side with her seldom° on the table, and there
were the most damning variations, which it was impossible
to explain, except on the supposition that both pamphlet
end evidence were fabrications. In the pamphlet it was
asserted falsely, as the plaintiff admitted, that chloroform
was used. Could they credit the statemonta of the perilous
who admitted that the awful charge of using chloroform
for • base purpose, levelled in print against a most respect-
able physician, was wholly untrue . It was said that the
pamphlet asserted a violation, not an intrigue, as Lady
Wilde io her letter stated, but the flysheet that went
with the pamphlet set out • number of letters which,
with the statement also printed that there were family
matters which did not redound to the credit of Sir William
Wilda involved, clearly raised the inference, the false infer.
once, that there was an intrigue between herself and Sir
William Wilde. Those letters, he deliberately asserted,
were intended to represent an intrigue. The " family
2 I matters " are alluded to in the pamphlet as justifying the
renewal of the intimacy after the alleged
♦ Why, in the eyes of men of common sense, the very fact
6 that the plaintiff said she renewed her intimacy was 4.-
5 structive of her whole case of violatioa. It is
! true that Sir William Wilde, who was married, wrote
letters to Miss Travers, but they were such letters as he
j rui.zbt fairly write to a woman whose literary Wants he
♦ admired. Counsel read several of the letters already pub.
▪ balled, and west on to say that the case was one of cruel,
2 vindictive persecution of Lady Wilds, who wished to avoid
1 the plaintiff, sad who suffered the most poignant anguish,
; spent sleepless sights, and anxious, dreadful days. from
her conduct. Miss Travers, not content with what she had
4 done in Dublin, followed Lady Wilds to Bray, where she
7 was living with her children. She employed • newsboy
5 with • parcel of these iolaraoas pamphlets, and with the
; placard. " Sir William Wilde sod Speranza," and sent him
" along the beach, se that he might go into every
house, and
that he might leave in the house of Lady Wilde, is the
preesuce of her children and *eremite, the scurrilous pro-
ductions. Was that the conduct that entitled this woman
to sympathy I Was that the conduct that justified her in
being paraded before the jury as • paragon of female excel-
lence! It was an outrage on all the notions entertaioed on
the subject Ile pitied Serjeant Armstrong for his notices
of female excellence. OD the day this woman did that act -
ea the day that she sent her vile pamphlet into LadyWilile's
house in the presence of her children and servants, Lady
Wilde sat down and penned the letter which she sent to
Dr. Travers, is the hope that he would endeavour to arrest
his daughter is her tremendous career. It was falsely
charged that Lady Wild, wrote the letter at the dictation
and prompting of her husband. She did no such thing •
else wrote it herself, and the statement that her husband

dictated it was without a wilds of foundation, and should
not have been made. Did they excuse the lady who
wrote the letter' Would any of them in his heart say
that a woman, treated se Lay Wilde had been, had not
the right to apply to the father of this girl—the only
friend she had—to prevent her pursuing her career of in-
sult and disgrace' The true solution of the eke was, as
had been expressed in a letter from Sir William Wilde.
that she was not accountable for her acts. The learned
counsel, having referred to some other matters, called upon
the jury to believe that the writing of the letter was
justified, that every word of it was true, and that it was
such a production as properly came from Lady Wilde ;
and, under those circumstances be expressed his belief that
they would give a verdict for his clients.
Lady Wilde was examined—She said that she bad
offended the plaintiff by refusing to see her, and her re-
venge was the consequence. She thought that the plaintiff's
intention was to set up the supposition of an intrigue.
Did you believe in an intrigue ?—tiever.
Chief Justice Monahan—Did you come to the coeclusion
that it was the intention of the writer to represent that
there was an intrigue, although you totally disbelieved its
existeece ?—Precisely.
Mr. Sidney—At the time you wrote the letter did you
believe that the plaintiff consorted with the newsboys'—
Yes ; that she hired them, and spoke to them, and gave
them directions to come to my bonze.
Chief Justice Monahan—You did not mean to impute
immoral conduct with the newsboys'
Witness—Oh no, my lord ; they were little boys 10 or 12
years of age.
In reply to Mr. Sidney, the witness gave answers deny-
ing, seriatim, the interpretations put upon the various
passages; she said she considered the conduct of the
plaintiff in reference to the defendant as disgraceful, and
that she had offered threat, for the purpose of extracting
. _

_
Thus closed the direct examination of the witness.
Serjeant Armstrong then
.proceeded with the cross-
exanunation. The CSJO Ir&S still tuafiniatted when the court
rose.

THE APPEAL OF BISHOP COIESSO.
(THIS DAY.)

The hearing of this case before the Judicial Com-
mittee of the Privy Council was rammed this morning.
The Queen's Advocate (Sir it. Phillimore) continued his
address for the respondent. He commenced by observing
that the two questions which be had raised on the
previous day were—first, whether the metropolitan
(the Bishop of Capetown) had power to deprive the Bishop
of Natal ; and secondly, whether it was in their lordships'
power to reveres that sentence by adviring the crown
se a court of appeal. For the purpose of
showing that the metropolitan possessed the
power which he had exercised the learned counsel cited the
case of "Lucy v. Watson," and he contended from this case
that the bishop had power to try a suffragan by ecclesiastical
law under the authority vested in him by his letters patent.
Chief Justice Holt there held that to dispute the authority
of the archbishop was not treating him with the respect
to which his ofiice entitled him, and an application to the
Court of Queen's Bench for a prohibition was refused.
course that tended to establish the authority
of the metropolitan. The facts of the case were
these. A clergyman had been deprived by the
Bishop of St. David a ; he appealed ag►inst the decision to
the Archbishop of Canterbury ; the Bishop of St. David's
resisted the appeal on the ground that the archbishop
had no power to review his judgment ; ►nd the result
was that a commission of delegates to whom the matter was
referred held that the authority of the metropolitan was
supreme, and that he was in fact a court in himself. The
learned counsel then referred to a sentence of deprivation
pronounced against the Bishop of Clogher by the Arch-
bishop of Armagh, and cited the *pinion of the law officers
of the crown at the period to show that what was done
had their entire approval.
The Lord Chancellor was understood to say that he did
not think that opinion very important.

The Queen's Advocate said he had cited it because he
thought it applied to a case in which their lordship. had to
advise the crown. Lord Eldon was in the cabinet when the
opinion of the law officers was given, and must have approved
of its being acted upon. The learned counsel then entered
into an elaborate argument for the purpose of showing that
Bishop Colenso had no right of appeal, and that if he
felt himself aggrieved he ought to have appealed in the first
instance to the supreme civil tribunal of Natal, and to have
exhausted every means of obtaining red:ere before coming
to the Privy Council. He had not been deprived of
his office of bishop, but simply of the right to exercise
it in the colony, and that was a matter which was
left by the letters patent to the metropolitan. Assuming
that the patent of the Bishop of Capetown was valid so far
as it gave au appeal to the Archbishop of Canterbury,
the crown had pointed out a way, u it had a right to do, in
which the power of appeal was to be exercised.
[The argument was proceeding when our report left.]

Yesterday Sir R. Mayne, Chief Commissioner of
Metropolitan Police, visited Sheerness Dockyard, for the
purpose of inspecting the police force at that establishment
which is under the immediate direction of Superintendent
Strength, the bead of the Metropolitan Police doing duty
at Chatham. During his inspection Sir R. Mayne saw the
members of the force go through the naval sword drill, in
which the whole of the dockyard police are now instructed.
Those of the London brokers who desire to
escape the payment to the corporation of the tar of 5/.
levied by act of parliament have organised a committee to
promote their cause, and issued a formal statement of their
case, by Mr. Russell, their agent.
Mr. Churchwarden Hoare hen sustained a severe
defeat. At Bristol he boasted that he had ten men in
limbo for not paying church rates. The speech, it seems,
was figurative. He had simply got an order against ten
persons for the payment of rates and costs. They disobeyed
the order, however, and instead of distraining upon their
goods he ha.; sought to institute criminal proceedings.
Yesterday be appeared at Cranbrook petty sessions to
prefer a charge against Mr. Hickmott, of Step'shunt—one
of the ten—of having disobeyed the order and thus rendered
himself liable to be committed for tri►l. Mr. Bennett, of
Serjentat's-inn, who appeared for Mr. Hickmott, contended
that it was Mr. Hoare who had disobeyed the order, which
required him to distrain. The magistrates dismissed the
charge, whereupon Mr. Hoare announced that he should
take the case to the sessions.

According to one of the Paris papers, L'A fri-
mine has been assured for 03.entGarden. and MIL. Nandi's,
Faure, and Madame Mane Battu are engaged to perform
in it. The ant act of this opera is now regularly put on
the stage at the Grand Opera.

Rossini has recommenced his Saturday recep-
tions at Paris. At the first of the season M. Leopold de
Meyer and M. Braga performed on the piano and violin.
A letter from Florence, in the Corriere Mercantile
of Genoa, give, an account of • bold attempt made on the
11th to rob the departmental office of the National Debt in
the former city. The police, having received information
in time, • sufficient force was concealed in the neighbouring
houses, and when the thieves, three in number, had effected
an entrance, and already broken open floe of the coffers,
containing 600,000 fr., they were sweated in the very act;
and in the course of the same night three of their accom-
plices, who had been on the look-out to give the alarm in
case the police should arrive, and had run away on seeing
the whole plot discovered, were arrested also.

EroN Cottroz.—Yesterday evening, by per-
mission of the Provost and Fellows of Eton College, the
members of the Collegers' Choir gave • vocal concert and
amateur theatrical performance in the College-hall, in the
presence of a large and distinguished audience. A tempo.
vary stne and proscenium, the latter decorated with the
Eton alms sod motto. Eva peepefoe. and the boat banners.
the whole being lighted with gas, bad been erected at one
end of the fine old hall, the rest of the room being fitted
with seats for the visitors. The Duire Donut na and Na-
tional Anthem, in which. according to the programme, the
audience were very naively requested to join, concluded the
evening's entertainments.

The very unusual entertainment of a rag-
gatherers' ball came off in this city on Monday night, at
which there could not have been lase than 300 rag men and
their wives and sweethearts. and other friends and ac-
quaiotanoes. The entertainment was given by a woman
who madii• good deal of money by the rag business.
Having just built a large brick shop on Richmond-street, a
little west of Church-street, on the south side, she deter-
mined to entertain her customers at • grand ball and
supper ; and not being very particular as to whether the
company should be select, she gave a general invita-
tion to all the beggars and rag mem in the city, and
neighbourhood. The "gentry" fell in with the idea, and
freely accepted the invitation. A sumptuous repast was
provided in a large room on the ground floor, to which the
beggars had free access during the whole evening. A
quadrille band supplied music for the company in the
room upstairs and "all went merry u a marriage bell." It
is said to have been a ludicrous eight to witness the me-
pan? i.e • quadrille, or entries off la an Irish" breakdows "
or " plantation "Pg.—Toronto Leader.

The population of the European nations is about
327,003,000. Their standing minima absorb 1,700.070 of
ths population, the upsass of whirl is nearly 100,000,0001.

METROPOLITAN BOARD OF WORK•'.

(TBIS DAY.)

Thu usual meeting of the Metropolitan Boar .1
Works was held this day at the office in Spriog•aardens ,
Mr. J. Timaitre in the chair.

The financial statement was presented, which showed the.
following cash balances in the hands of the tr ,rer
Current ecconnte6l,34g. ss. 2d.; deposit accounts, 'V
total, 391,14e1. 3e. 2d.; government securities, !0r,P131.
0a M.