The Express.
London, England, 1851-05-24 00:00:00

THE EXPREBB,m_ SATERDAY EVENING, MAY 24, 1851.

La intelligence.

ARCHES COURT-YESTERDAY.
Rama llnt O. L Ever.
THE VICAR OF BERKELEY'S CASE.

THR °PRIER GT TH EJ ODOR PROMOTELI HY MADAN V. KARR!
JUDGMENT.
A report of this case has already.appeared in our paper.
The learned judge delivered judgment this morning.
The court said this was a suit of office promoted by the
Rev. George Madan, of the diocese of Gloucester, against
the Reverend John Seaton Karr, vicar of Berkeley,
in the same county and diocese, brought to this court
by letters of request from the Bishop of Gloucester
and Bristol. In the first instance it would he
necessary to state the proceedings which had taken
plaeu in this most extraordinary cause, fur extraordi-
nary it was both in its circumstances, and in the mode in
which it had been conducted. The articles given in were ,
originally 27 in number, and contained charges of the moat
gross and disgraceful character which could by possibility
be brought against a minister in holy orders; and if they
should be proved, the consequence would be that this re-
' verend gentleman must be removed from the cure to which
he had been instituted, and from the spiritual care of those
members of the church who had been intrusted to his
guidance. The substance of the charges, as set forth in the
heading to the articles, was fur profane cursing and swear-
ing, for lewd and indecent conduct and conversation, and
having permitted lewd and indecent conduct in his house-
hold, for adultery, fornication, and incontinence, and
for acts of drunkenness and demeanour generally
unbecoming a clergyman, and likely to bring great
scandal on the chureh. In the first instance, when rumours
to the prejudice of Mr. Karr arose, the bishop directed a
private inquiry to be made by five beneficed clergymen of
his diocese, in order to ovoid, if possible, greater publicity
than was absolutely neceaaary. The court was
by no means
an advocate for the institution of preliminary inquiries in
the mode pointed out by the act of parliament, for it had
had sufficient experience in these eases to see that such in-
quiries were always attended with unnecessary expense,
and only laying the foundation for evidence which wits not
to be relied upon, although it might form a principal part
of the depositions used in the cause. It approved of this private
inquiry.by the bishop, and it did not appear that any objection
to the inquiry was mule by Mr. Karr. The inquiry took
place on 'Slay 10th, 1619, and was atteridectby Mr. Karr, also
Mr. Gaisfurd, a solicitor of Berkeley, of whom the court had
heard a great deal in the course of these proceedings, and
likewise the mutual (ricotta of both parties. Whether all
these persons were the most proper to be examined on the
occasion might admit of some doubt, particularly Mr.
Gaisfurd, who was materially interested in the inquiry
going forward. The court did not impute to Mr. Gaisfurd
that he would state anything not absolutely true, but where
ha had such a strong interest to maintain, the charges
brought against Mr. Karr, it thought he was a
=most likely to give an undue degree of
once to facts which might bear a more lenient inter-
pretation. There was no authentic statement before the
awn of what took place at that inquiry, but two of the
rev. gentlemen who were present had since been examined,
god they had given an account of what pulsed to the best
iof their nformation. Thc result of that inquiry appeared
to have been that Mr. Karr was not cleared from: the
charges brought against him, and the present proceedings
were, therefore, rendered unasuidable. It appeared to the
court the ease might properly lie divided into two parts
separate and apart from each other--that referring to the
adultery charged to have been eommitted with Mrs. Gait-
ford, and that which confined itself to the huhitual inter-
course pleaded to have taken place between Mr. Karr and u
person who lived in his house al housekeeper, together with
his general conduct, habits of intoxication, and the use °Nigh&
and indecent language in his household. Upon the articles
which related to the charge of adultery, 30 witnesses had
been examined in the registry of the court, and 13 by com-
mission at Glum-ester. The reason which induced the court
to Nay the case might he divided into two parts was that the
foundation of the charge of adultery was the only subject of
inquiry before the five rev. gentlemen ; at such time there
being not the least suggestion that Mr. Karr's general con-
duct had ever been otherwise than correct. The fourth
article set forth the nature of the connexion subsisting be-
tween Mr. Gaisfurd and the Rev. Mr. Karr, the one being
the vicar of Berkeley, and the other (Mr. Garden') a solici-
tor employed by Mr.-K err as his agent to receive tithes and in
other transactions. That in consequence of this connexion
there was free access to the house of Mr. Gaiaford at all
times, and that Mr. Karr as ailed himself of this opportunity
to pay frequent visits and constant attentions to Mrs. Gai.
ford in her husband's absence; that such visits having come
to the notice of Mr. Gaisfurd and his friends, that gentle-
man remonstrated with Mr. Karr on the 30th June, 1846,
implored hint not to disturb his domestic peace, and forbade
all communication between him and Mrs. Gaisfurd, except
such as could nut be avoided in mixed society. That Mr.
Karrpromiwel to abstain, but notwithstanding lie continued
to hold frequent interviews with Mrs. Gaistunl, and that
Mr. Gaisfurd, on 2.2nd July,lSlS, espressly enjoined Isis wife
to hold uo communication with the rev. gentleman un any
subject whatever. The sixth article pleaded that Mr. Karr
frequently visited Mrs. Gaisfurd in the latter part of 1617
and the early part of 1818, in her husband's house, and
that he sometimes went into the parlor or dining-room
without making any inquiry whether she was at home or
not. Here were no personal familiarities, indecent conver-
sations, nor any charge of adultery, ur even anything lead-
ing up to a suspicion of adultery, beyond the visit.. In the
seventh article it was pleaded that on the 23rd April, 1848,
Mr. Karr met Mrs. Gaisfurd by appointment, and remained
in conversation ith her half an hour, close to the vicarage
gate at Berkeley, and on such occasion agreed to meet her
in London. The eighth pleaded her having informed her
husband of her wish to visit some friends in London, and that
accordingly she went up to London on 25th April. The articles
went on to allege that Mr. Karr proceeded to London on
the following day, and went to I ladong's Hotel, Oxford-
street, and un the 27th pert-in-rued the marriage service on
the occasion of his brother's marriage, at All Soul's Church,
Langham-place ; that Mrs. tiaiaford on that day left the
house of her friend under the pretence of taking a walk,
and went in a cab to the church in question, where she
requested the pew-opener to place her in a seat so that she
could see the party coming out of the vestry ; that on such
occasion Mr. Karr recognised her, and atter the conclusion
of the service conversed some considerable time with her, COCIVr OF AANKItUPTCY.—YESTERDAY.
and afterwards returned to Fladong's Hotel. This, there- DEVOuk. Ma Consioiosra Vasa.
fore, was the first meeting of the parties in London 16 let. GADEVDEN,
according to the allegation pleaded in the articles. The bankrapt, described as a coal merchant, of Carmar-
It further alleged that Mr. Karr, having made then, and of Brompton-square, came up for his last csami-
an assignation with the lady. she visited him at his hotel at nation. The accounts prepared by Mr.l homers of Cirtshati..
11 o'clock on the following day, for the purpose of an adul- street, extended from the 23ril of August, 1849, to the 29th
terous intercourse taking place between them. This was lof November last, and showed the following results :—To
the first charge of adultery having been committed by the creditors, 1,734/.; ditto secured, 2,1391.; liabilities, 4601. ;
parties, but this charge was afterwards abandoned ; and the ; liabilities on bills receivable, 1,863/. ; coals sold, 2,4711. ;
court thought it quite impossible that any adultery could commission and purchase of railway shares, 42t.; improved
have taken place its the hotel under the circumstances. The ! value of lease of colliery, 1,804/. There were no entries of '
twelfth article was of great importance. It stated that after ! good debts or property ; the property held by creditors was
Mrs. Gaisford had been in the hotel some minutes Mr. put down at 1,0021. ; expenses uf colliery. 2,433 r. ; personal
Karr let her out at the private door in 01i1Civendiah-street, expenses, 616/. ; interest on mortgages, 242/. ; losses, 7184.;
and that she remained in a shop until he called a cab, into , debts due prior to commencement of account, 1.171. It ap-
which they both entered, and were driven to a house of ; petered from the proceedings that he had been thrice bank-
ill-fame, in a street unknown, where they remained for an tort or insolvent before. Mr. Struve, mineral agent of
hour and a half; that afterwarda they waited at !Swansea, is stated to have valued the colliery, and to have
a brush shop at the corner of such street; and I recommended Major Sitwell to embark a capital of 6,0001.
Mrs. Gaisfurd at length returned in another cabriolet to ! therein ; the bankrupt's interest is therefore estimated at
her friend s house. This was the article as originally given 4,0021.
in, upon the proof of which the whole case would eventu- 1 His Honour observed that there would not be a farthing
ally turn. A supplemental article to supply the deficiencies for the creditor* unless the lease should realise more than
in this origival one was afterwards brought in, and on ! the sum for which it wax mortgaged.
that the case must now depend as to the actual commission Mr. Herbert Lloyd, for the assignees, said lie should re-
of the crime. There never was a point left in more my. serve any opposition until the certificate meeting.
terious darkness than the description in the 12th article as Mr. Whitmore, the official assignee, said the accounts
it originally stood, of the house of ill fame in a street un-; were the best the bankrupt could render.
known, the number unknown, the parties awaiting in an I The bankrupt passed.
unknown brush shop, and in fact where everything con- I APPLICATION TOR DtmCHAROE.
meted with the charge adultery was so generally unknown. I Mr. Lawrence appeared for a bankrupt named Jackson,
Upon some of the articles being directed to be reformed, an ; who was brought up in custody, and applied for his dis-
affidavit was made by the proctor for Mr. Ma- charge, urging that three months' imprisonment, which he
dan, and also by the promoter himself, The • had undergone, was sufficient to condoms for any offence he
proctor's affidavit was to the effect that at the time' might have committed.
the articles were originally given in the transactions Mr. Taylor, fur the assignees, said there were no assets I
pleaded in the twelfth were set forth as fully as was then whatever, and the 'reddening creditor had been out of
possible for them to be, but that shortly before the sitting pocket about 401.
of the court further facts, pleaded in the additional j Mr. Lawranee urged that no fraud had been proved.
article, had come to his knowledge. Mr. Madan's affidavit His Honour said he considered it a grass fraud for any
stated that he left everything to the discretion of his proc- man to dispose of all his property just on the eve of bank-
tor. The court entertained no doubt whatever as to the ruptcy. Here property to the amount of 166/. had been
truth of the above affidavits; but if the 'Seta and cireum- made away with ; and he could not release such a person
stances contained in the supplemental article were not from prison until he had been six months in custody.
known to the proctor, it would ask were they not known to ; Pkvertost TOR AURANGEMENT.
WIRE of the agents who had been collecting evidence long ! Mr. Fraser applied to the court, in a petition for arrange- !
before the articles were given in ? The new plea, after meld, under the following circumstances:—The debtor had
reciting what had been previously stated in the twelfth petitioned the court under the 212 h section, filing there-
article, alleged that it had since been ascertained that after with a list of hid creditors. A second list had subsequently
leaving Fladong's Hotel on the day in question, been filed, and amongst the names were several solicitors
the parties proceeded in an orange-coloured cal, to and bill discounter.. As the crediton were apprehensive
a glove shop in Oxford-street, and from thence to of the property being removed, he applied to the court
the Poultry, where having changed their cub, they either to order the messenger to remain in possession, or to
proceeded iu one of a blue colour to a house of ill fame direct an inventory to be taken.
ell Weymouthierraee, Hackney-road, stopping on their, His Honour said the debtor might have removed the pro-
way at the Roebuck public house, where the: driver was in- ! party as easily before he petitioned the court, as after, if he
vited to take a glass of ale, and was asked if he knew of a were knavishly inclined. Fraud was nut to be presumed
house of the abovecharatter. 'rind the parties,afterremaining because a trader had petitioned the court.
in the house upwards of an hour, and until about half-past Mr Fraser did not wish to press with any severity on the
12, went to a brush shop at the corner of the said terrace, debtor ; but it must be remembered that all proceedings in
when Mr. Karr left Mrs. Gaisfurd and procured another bankruptcy were necessarily suspended till the petition was
cab, in which she was driven home to her friend's. The finally adjudicated on. All he alined was that the court
court thought there never was a detail of facts more • would protect the creditors by causing the messenger to re-
minutely set forth than in this supplementary article. main in possession, or having an inventory made of the
These facts were never communicated to any person uiuntildeibitobfio
sirtffo effects,
declined interfere..
the month of February, 1840; however, having arrived'
at the conclusion of the articles charging adultery with , IN as_ 31•D0w....u..
•
seonsider - Little

1810.

156
221
143
1548
230
90
2271

Mrs. Gaitfonl, it now remained to6---er the manner
in which they were proved, or attempted to be proved.
as against Mr. Karr. Upon the former part of the charge
several witnesses had been examined, the more important
witnesses being Mr. Gaisfunl and Miss Ainyas. Mr. Gais-
ford, on his examination, stated be had not taken an active
part in the suit, but had acted as agent to the promoters or
proctor tine.: January last. The evidence as to the in-
timacy between the parties which subsisted at Berkeley,
deposed to by Mir. Amyaa. was to the effect that Mr.
Karr attentions were of on alarming nature, and that he
received a letter fruits Mrs. Gaisford, but no particular
facts were spoken to. The court then referred to the testi- 1
mossy of Mr. Gaisford, as to the conduct of Mr. Karr
at Berkeley, but it did nut think it necessary toi
travel far into that part of the edit, as there was nothing
to lead to a suspicion of actual criminality:between the par-
ties before they left for London. After going fully through
the testimony of the witnesses in support of the alleled
meeting at All Souls Church, and the subsequent interview
cat Fladung's hotel, the learned judge said, in the mind of
the court the evidence was satisfactory on this part, of the
case., to prove that Mrs. liaisfurd slid call upon Mr. Karr

The bankrupt was a printer, in Queen street. 1..
was the adjourned meeting fur the last examination. The
balance-sheet, prepared by Mr. Thomas, extends over a year
and 10 months prior to the 26th of March last. He owes
to unsecured creditor:, 3,496/. ; the assets are put down at,
1301., in good debts, and 2,440/, in property ; but it is
stated that the property is in dispute, being claimed both'
by the assignees under this estate, and by Geo. Topham, •
late partner of the bankrupt. There was also an item of
2,1831., entered as " property held on hire, but claimed by
the assignees," which consisted of a printing-machinet
valued at 6001., supplied by C. Rich; and a quantity ef
type, valued at 1,483/., supplied by Miller and Richard.
The bankrupt states that this property was held under SR
agreement, by whichhe was to pay 20 per cent. per annum,
wits interest, for five years, such sums, in ease of failure,
Ito be considered as payments by way of hire, and the pro-
, perty to revert to the vendors. The profits were stated at
3,37x1. ; trade expenses, 1,9831; personal expenses, 1,185!;
WWII, 641. ; deficiency at the commencement of the ac-
count, 442/.
Mr. Lawranee supported the bankrupt, who passed un-
opposed.

at his hotel. If it wu not her, Mr. Karr should have told I INSOLVENT DEBTORS COURT.—YESTEItDAT.
the court who it was, and as he had not done so, he must ,
Mom vas Ciitr Cownistosd
be contented to beat the burden of suspicion which attached
toe MATTER or Jossern JOLLY.
to such en occasion. If Mr. Karr had any regard for his This ease, which was reported in our paper on a former
character, and wished to stand high in the opinion of his occasion, again came before the court, and occupied several
parishioners, he ought not to have allowed this hours. Mr. Sargood opposed for the only creditor, Mr.
matter to remain in doubt ; he ought to have ad-
Thompson; and Mr. Nichols supported.
mitted the fact, or explained it away ; however, he A lengthened investigation took place respecting the die-
(the learned judge) was perfectly satisfied no adultery was position of 3001. which the insolvent had received on the
committed at the hotel. As to what became of these par- death of his mother-in-law, the wife of the opposing encli-
tics after they left the hotel in a cab, the evidence of the tor, it being alleged that it had been imp .operly got rid of.
two cabmen by no means satisfied the mind of the court The insolvent persisted that the money had all gone, and
that Mr. Karr and Mrs. Gaisford did go down the Poultry, he had made out an account of its disposition, on which
or stop at a shop in Oxford-street, or get into a second eau account he was now rigidly examined, as also a nephew to
at the Mansion-house, or ever went to Weymouth-terrace,
as highly important to have shown whom he stated that he had paid 501. for monies borrowed.
or the brush shop. It w
that these parties were driven to these several places, In the course of the case it appeared that the insolvent had
paid is Miss Thompson SOI., and her attendance was us-
pnive that actual adultery had been committed; not only quired.
had the evidence on this point failed. but an alibi had been; The Chief Commissioner eventually adjourned the ease
set up by Mr. Karr, which was supported by several wit-Ito Tuesday next, for further evidence as to the disposal et
nesse,. There was nothing in corroboration of the evidence; the money.
of the cabmen. The people at the Roebuck Tavern had ! Mr. Commissioner Law disposed of a number of eases In
been examined, but they knew nothing of Mr. Karr's visit; f his own court, in one of which he set aside fit. a year out of
mud the people atthe brushshop anti at the house in question
were in the same state of ignorance, the salary- of tide-waiter in the Customs for his creditors:
and denied all know- I the insolvent had a large family to support. The other
ledge of the parties. With regard to the examination of cases were of no public importance.
the second cabman there was a circumstance the court could
not pass over. The witness in question was taken twice
down to Berkeley to identify Mr. Karr, which he failed in
doing; it appeared his examination in Chief, however, was
attended by an interval of several days, during wheel :time
he was in the custody of the parties, and was one whole day
with the proctor's clerk for the purpose of correcting dates
and items. Under common and ordinary circumstances the
court was in the habit of expreaeing its displeasure when-
ever there was an interval of any considerable time between
the examination in chief and the examination on interro-
gatories, because it afforded parties an opportunity
of c rrecting what they may have stated in theft.
evidence in chief. But in a case like the present
it was quite impossible not to express its strong
disapprobation of the course which had here been,
pursued. Every attempt had been made to induce this
witness to depose to the identity of Mr. Karr by taking him
down to Be. keley, to i,try whether on a second examination
he might nut be able to speak to it. Upon this part of the
rase the court was of opinion the charge of actual crimi-
nality between Mr. Karr and Mrs. Gaisford was nut made
out au as to enable it to pronounce that gentleman guilty of
adultery. This charge had been the foundation of the
whole proceedings, because till this matter was first in-
vestigated nothing was said or suggested that tended to
throw discredit uu Mr. Karr's character as to his general
demeanour or deportment. Unfortunately Mr. Karr had
himself left the case in very considerable doubt, diffi-
culty, and suspicion. Ile might be innocent of the
charges made ; yet he had not condescended to give
the court any information in his allegation as to how far
he proceeded in the cab from Fladong's lintel, and having
the means in his power would not protect himself front the
suspicious circumstances attending his COllllOllOll with this
lady ; he must, therefore, submit to that suspicion which he
had brought upon himself. The court then proceeded to
consider the latter part of the case relative to the connection
said to have subsisted between Mr. Karr and his house-
keeper, Sarah Knight, formerly Sarah Barrow, who had
been examined, but front the nature of whose testimony
the court was of opinion it could place no reliance on her.
The other witnesses to this portion of the case, including
the charge of habitual intoxication, profane *wearing, and
lewd conversation, were either immediate servants of Mr.
Karr, who had been dismissed by him or had left his service,
under the idea they bad been injured or ill treated by him.
The parties, however, who had been examined as to the
character of Mr. Karr sjsike most strungly in his favour as
far as their means of observation went, while not one
single individual of the parish of Berkeley had been induced
to speak against his character and habits, excepting one man
of the name of Rutter. It was, therefore, somewhat extra.
unlinary that, with these habits of habitual intoxication,
swearing, indecent language, and this connection going on
with his housekeeper, that Mr. Karr should have had this
additional circumstance, that, prima facie, his conduct was
the very reverse of that imputed to him. plow did this
happen i Why, Mr. Gaisford even had not been called
ulam to prove them facts. It was also proved
that Mr. Karr had family prayers every night,
which was extremely difficult to reconcile with the
habits of habitual intoxication. After commenting
on the ruinous expense to which the parties would be put
in the suit, and the heavy payment to witnesses, the court
said it thought the evidence on the latter part of the can
failed completely. There was a failure of prim!. of the
other charges brought against him. The learned judge
could not altogether divest his mind of the impression made
upon it with respect to the conduct of the witness Sarah
Barrow and the language she was stated to have used on
many occusiona,that gross conduct had becn going ott during
the time of Mr. Karr incumbency of the vicarage of
Berkeley ; neither could lie (the learned judge) die est him-
'self of the strong impression of the imprudence, to
say the least, in the conduct of Mr. Karr with
respect to Mrs. Oaisforil ; it was not consistent with the ge-
neral character and deportment of Mr. Karr that lie should
allow such a stain to rest on him while he had the means
;of removing it so completely in his own power. With re-
ference to the question of costs, while the court attributes!
' nothing to the promoter of the suit, Mr. Madan, or to the
bishop of the diocese, for it felt sure he would not sanction
anything that was improper in the proceedings, it could not
but think far greater expenses had been incurred than the
Car warranted. Under the circumstance*, however, the
court could only say that Mr. Karr had been unduly per-
secuted for he had by his conduct brought it entirely upon
himself. It, therefore, pronounced that the promo-
ter had failed in establishing the guilt of Mr. Karr,
with respect to Mrs Gaisford, and also with regard to the
latter charges; but still it was of opinion Mr. Karr was nut
altogether cleared from the monition of the court. It would
therefore admonish him to be more careful for the future.
Under all the circumstances, it would make no order as to
the costs, leasing them to be borne by each party. It im-
puted nothing by way of blame either to Mr. Nlailan the
Idabel) of the diocese, who, under the circumstances, could
not have abstained from prosecuting the suit; but it trusted
such a ease would never again be brought before this or any
other court.

THE POLICE COURTS.
BOW-STREET.

Two men, named lin; es. and
Edwardes, were charged
with stealing a pocket handkerchief from Mr. T. Prichard,
a gentleman from the country.
Police-sergeant May, of the City police, stated that on
Monday night he saw the prisoners in company with a third
person, following the prosecutor, who was walking by
Somerset-house. Saw one of the men take a handkerchief
from prosecutor's pocket, and then with his companions
walk away. Witness directly told the gentleman of the
occurrence, and then went after the prisoners, one of whom
escaped. Could swear that the two prisoners were in the
company of the third at the time.
Mr. Prichard said he could not identify the prisoners,
and Mr. Henry thought there w is not sufficient evidence to
justify him in sending the ease to the sessions.
Sergeant May thought the re was quite sufficient evidence.
Mr. Itenry—lt is not in your place to make observations,
and if you are guilty of such impertinence again, I shall
order you out of court. No officer out of the City would be
so impertinent. lam quite aware that constables are very
often anxious to make up a case fur the sessions, and send
in their expenses, without considering the great cunt to the
public ; but it is my business to consider that cost, and as
there is nut .• sufficient evidence" against the prisoners I
shall discharge them.
MARYLEBONE.
_ _

Charles Bailey, a very respectably dressed man, was
charged with having, between two and three o'clock on
Thursday afternoon, in Sevmour-creseent, Eustou-square,,
kicked an organ upon which an Italian boy was playing,
and thereby done damage to the amount of G. 6d. The
evidence of police constable 326 S was gone into, but all
that he could say was that defendant was not wiser, and
that he was given into custody by a person who witsvmsed
the damage which was done. The party alluded to was
not in attendance to make any statement in reference to
the transaction, and the Italian boy was unable to speak a
word of English. The defendant was discharged upon his
paying to a frk al of the organist the suns claimed for the
mischief which the instrument had sustained.

1113
221
238
188
262 f
90
260