The Press.
London, England, 1858-07-24 00:00:00

E PRESS, ti ULY 24, 1858.

ramp Both were children at the time, and it
turned out that they only saw the parties going to
and returning from the church. Both proved, how-
ever, that they remembered seeing the marriage
procession and partaking of the bridal cake. This
was the case on which the defendant relied for
establishing the fact of the marriage. The claimant,
en the contrary, contended that the absence of any
entry of the marriage in the register showed that
the ceremony had never been performed, and that,
in fact, no marriage had taken place. The jury,
however, without hesitation, thought that the
marriage was proved, and found a verdict for the

4.2fendan
ACTION FOR SLANDER.—ThiS case was tried at
Lincoln on Wednesda. Mr. Macaulay, Q.C., Mr.
Mellor, and Mr. W. H.y Adams were counael for the
plaintiff, and Mr. Sergeant Hughes was retained for
the defendant. Mr. Macaulay, who stated the case,
said the plaintiff is a miller and corn merchant re-
siding at Bardney, and the. defendant is a land valuer,
and a gentleman of considerable standing, living at
Stainfield-hall, near Wragley. In April, I 55.0, the
plaintiff and defendant were at a 'vestry meeting
at Bardney, when the defendant, pointing to Mr
Green, said—" You are a rogue ; you are a con
aiarad felon. I know that you are a rogue. It
was I who wrote to the inspector to come down
attn. you." The plaintiff said—" You don't think
so, Mr. Greetham ; if you did, I should take notice
of it,' and lie allowed the matter to pass over.
The defendant still continued to trade with the
plaintiff, and they frequently conversed and wrote
to one another. Some time ago the plaintiff had
one weight out of some twenty-five found to be short
to the extent of one quarter of an ounce in the half
stone weight, which would, if it were always used in
weighing flour, cheat the customer out of the
twelfth part of a farthing, and for this he was fined
11. About February last the plaintiff took a part
in defence of some relieving officer who was com-
plained against by the Vicar of Bardney, and the
following board day at Lincoln Mr. Greetham ( the
defendant), in the presence of the Hon. A. L. Mel-
ville and fourteen or fifteen other gentlemen, per-
sisted in making a statement then although not a
guardian, and in making this statement he referred
to the plaintiff, saying, "You do not know the
character of that man as I do ; he is a bad man ;
he is the pest of the parish; be is a dishonest
man ; he is not to be believed upon his oath ; he is
a convicted felon; he has robbed the poor." The
defendant was asked to apologize, and in reply
said that he had said no more than he could prove.
The defendant placed upon the record, first, " not
guilty," and secondly "justification," both of which
pleas, however, were withdrawn, and the qaestion
was merely one of assessment of damages. The
Judge: If a man has done wrong there is but one
way of getting out of it. I must say that it was a
right course to withdraw the plea of justification ;
this is to his credit. After a great deal of conversa-
tion, as to the terms of an apology, his lordship said
that he would dictate one which Mr. Hayes was to
object to, if his client could not accept it. The
apology was a full retraction of the. charge of want
of probity and honesty on the part of the plaintiff,
and an expression of regret that the defendant
should have used the expressions he did. This
arrangement having been acquiesced in, the jury
were discharged ; the defendant paying all costs in
the case.
THE " CHEM " OF HYSIEN.-011 Thursday last at
Worship-street, Richard Walker, a smartly-dressed
young fellow, described as a watchmaker in Wen-
lock-street, City-road, was charged with the following
assaults :—The first complainant was Mrs. Maria
Mills, a young married woman, considerably ad-
vanced in the family-way, who stated that, while in
her garden at Dalston that afternoon, with her
infant in her arms, she noticed the defendant in
another garden, two doom off, flourishing a broom-
stick about over his head with such violence that it
flew out of his hand, came over her wall, and very
narrowly escaped her infant's head. She remon-
strated with him upon his foolish conduct, for which
he abused her, and she went in-doors to stir the fire,
when a loud knocking came at the door, and on her
hurrying to open it, with the poker still in her
band, the defendant abruptly demanded his
broomstick, and tried to force his way past her
to get into her garden. She endeavoured to prevent
him, on which he wrenched the poker out of her hand,
and struck her a blow on the arm with it, causing a
contusion, which she now exhibited. Mrs.
Amy Whitty, the wife of a dairyman living closely
adjoining, said that she and her husband heard loud
cries of " Murder " from Mrs. Mills, and, knowing
her "interesting situation," ran to see what was the
matter with her. They found her crying very
bitterly, and accusing the defendant of having struck
her on the arm with a poker. Whether the witness
upbraided him or not she did not say, but the
defendant immediately turned upon her, and knocked
her down with such a violent blow in the face that
her arm, on which she fell, was much injured, and

she was stunned by the blow. The third com-
plainant was Mr. Whitty himself, who deposed that
on getting to Mrs. Mills he found that lady in a
fainting state, and the defendant engaged in " knock
ing her about." Mrs. Whitty supported Mrs
Mills in her arms, hut was at once knocked down
by the defendant, wbo demanded to know what
right be had to interfere. " The right that every
man has," said the witness, "who hears a woman
call' Murder' and Help,'" but the instant he had said
so the defendant challenged him to fight, struck
him and knocked him down, entirely spoiling his
new hat, and might have resorted to further violence
had not a constable fortunately come up at the
moment and relieved them all by capturing him.
A Mrs. Lucy Felsham gave just the same descrip-
tion of the outrages that the other witnesses had
given, and complained of the broomstick having
been also whirled into her garden before it entered
that of Mrs. Mills. The case of the defendant, in
support of which he called several witnesses, who
seemed to feel a warm interest in what they evi-
dently considered' his misfortune, was, that he had
only got married that morning, and on driving from
the church with his bride and one of the brides-
maids, a pretty young woman named Hepbzibah
Reynolds,
they went to a friend's house for the
marriage dinner, and some refreshment before it, and
then all adjourned to the garden, where the defen •
dant volunteered to exhibit his strength and prowess
in twirling a good-sized broomstick. This he did
successfully for some time, but it finally flew out of
his hand into the garden of Mrs. Mills, at whose
door he knocked, and civilly asked for its restoration ;
Mrs. Mills, however, showed him a poker, and threat-
ened to use it if he did not instantly leave, upon
which he gently took the poker from her and flung
it away, and she immediately fell on the pavement,
got up, and " fought like a man ;" but neither Mrs.
Mills nor Mrs. Whitty was struck, and, though Mr.
Whitty himself certainly was, that was another
matter altogether, as the injury was inflicted in pure
self-defence. "In feet," said the defendant, " I had
enough to do to defend myself, for all three set upon
me at once, and if Mrs. Mills's arm was injured, it
was in twisting the poker away from her to save my-
self." The evidence for the defence almost proved
too much, but it was altogether too conflicting, Mr.
Hammitt said, for him to deal with, and he should
therefore send the case before a jury, with liberty
to the defendant to put in bail, himself in 401. and
two sureties in 20/. each ; but, as the magistrate also
required the usual twenty-four hours' notice, to make
sure of the bails' solvency, the defendant, who looked
petrified at the decision, was sent to pass his wedding
night in the House of Detention.

CURIOUS CASE.--COONBES AND HAYNES Y. Coons
—This was a cause, in the Court of Probate, for.
proving the validity of a will. Mr. Day appeared
for the plaintiffs, and Mr. Norman for the de-
fendant. Mr. Day, in opening the case, said the
declaration alleged that George Caines Coombes,
on the 11th of January, 1854, made a will, to which
the defendant pleaded it was not executed
according to the provisions of the act. The
testator was a cheesemonger, carrying on business
in Cow Cross-street, Smithfield, and was married
to the first-named plaintiff in 1836. The second-
named plaintiff was the deceased's nephew, and re-
sided with him for upwards of twelve years previous
to his death. The defendant, John Langhorn
Coombes, is a farmer, residing in Dorsetshire. The
testator was a man of singularly close and penurious
habits, and observed confidential relations only with
his nephew, his wife being wholly unacquainted with
his pecuniary affairs ; he was in the habit of
speculating, and at his death was seised of a
tolerable estate. About four years since the testator
inquired of the plaintiff, Haynes, if he bad seen a
paper (his will) lying about, and he said No, on which
the testator said, " Then I suppose I must write out
another." Some little time after Haynes saw him
writing on the paper in court for which probate was
asked, when the testator remarked it was a carious-
looking paper. Shortly before the testator's death,
on the 29th January last, his nephew asked him if
he wished to see his brother (the defendant) and
settle his affairs. He replied no, his affairs were all
settled, and his wife was provided for. Shortly
after his death search was made for his will, and the
piece of paper was found in a leather case in a box.
The paper in question is a dirty, greasy portion of
an Oxford,Worcester, and Wolverhampton dividend
circular, in which company the testator had some
shares. The document was in the testator's hand-
writing, and was dated 111th January, 1854.-- !It
was signed by him, and attested by two witnesses,
named West and Kemp. The plaintiff was in a pecu
liar position with reference to the attestators of the
will. He was unable to prove if they were dead, or
that the signatures were in their handwriting, or
who or what they were. The strictest search had
been made for them, and advertisements inserted in
the papers without success. West, one of the wit-
nesses, was believed to he a person who was inti-
mately acquainted with the testator. Ha was believed

717

to be a Latter-day Saint, and attended Mormon
meetings, and that ho had left England for the Salt
Lake, but no tidings could he obtained of him. Kemp
was supposed to have been one of the testator's tenants
at Somers-town, but could not be found. On making
further search after the testator's death a paper was
found, dated in 1849, with a similar disposition of
the property, and a third paper, dated 1831, which
was previous to his marriage, and consequently
no mention was made of any wife. By the paper
in question he provided for his wife (who was an
elderly person) for her life, or so long as she re-
mained a widow ; a portion of the property was
given to Haynes, the nephew ; and the freehold
property in Dorset to the defendant. There were
other legacies to other parties. Unless the plaintiff
succeeded in proving the will in question, that of
1831 would stand good, and in that case the widow
would be left penniless. The learned counsel then
called witnesses in support of the above facts. Mr.
George C. Haynes deposed that he was nephew of
the deceased, who was a man of strange habits. He
lived with his uncle about twelve years, and about
four years previous to his death he asked witness if
he had seen his will. He replied he bad not, on
which deceased said, "Then I must write out
another." Witness afterwards saw him writing the
document in question, and deceased said, " I sup-
pose the gentlemen in Doctors' Commons will
laugh to see such a document come in to be ad-
ministered to." Witness said he thought they
would, and deceased remarked, "I dare say they
have more curious documents than this come in
occasionally." In January, 1857, when a bill was
sent in for repairs to his property in Dorset, de-
ceased remarked what a curious document it was,
and said, "My will is not so bad as that." Mr.
Barrett, in the employ of Mr. Devismi, cheese-
monger, Sec., Newgate-street, deposed to the docu-
ment being in deceased's handwriting. He spoke of
attempts having been made to discover information
of the witnesses, but without effect, and referred to
West having gone to America to join the Mormons.
He said West wag a schoolmaster, and assisted in
keeping Mr. Devismi's books, but witness could
not speak to hia handwriting. The learned
judge said that was important, and further in-
quirias must be made respecting it. Witness
continued—He had been unable to procure any
document in West's handwriting or his signature.
A female, named Seppin, who was a niece of the
deceased, had lived with him many years, and was
to take an annuity of 2C2. a year under the will, said
she knew West well, and recollected he and his wife
leaving England to join the Mormons. After be bad
been gone some time a letter was received by a
relative, stating they could not get beyond New
Orleans for want of means. Evidence having been
given and a general character, and the steps that had
been taken to discover the witnesses, the learned
judge adjourned the case for the production of wit-
nesses from Mr. Devismi's to speak to West's hand-
writing.

A Dertrtmos on the subject of the removal of the
West Riding Assizes had an interview with the Lord
President of the Council on Tuesday, at the Privy
Council Office. The deputation consisted of Alder-
man Botterill of Leeds, Alderman Richard Wilson of
Leeds, Councillor J. M. Barret of Leeds, Councillor
B. Caries of Leeds, and Mr. John Arthur Ikin, town
clerk of Leeds. The deputation was introduced by
the Right Hon. M. T. Baines, M.P., and Mr. George
Skirrow Beecroft, M.P.