The Express.
London, England, 1846-12-17 00:00:00

where-
that he sem not aoqua,anel with the estate till about the 3rd about.
of
ettintatwesbe
htteisdrh,ewrelrod:gioni:tiinii:ealaPysdge64erie-i
here rein; Waliams's deposition,
which
walk
wthstancill
gwvered-thalt twsasheohuadt
niely, that the deponent was an auctioneer, so ca. and had gone to Italy, leaving no trace of her
to this effect •
March, 1838 ; that Rayner then claroulted him about getting upon the su.s:ects and he remained with his regiment, fondly
his rent, and asked him to go and look at the estate and to hoping that notheSl but prudential motives Pad induced his
pspierakti
est o,
namelyth plaintiffe
Rayner,th atthdeeppoinsiennttitra,visedand
tht that t
deponent,
all threenen ordered wife
and
ad ,htco P
W•
rote totbehyisenwr ire stohistelrleghien;
should, in the course of two or three days, meet on the estate, was coming, and so by the: she would meet him at Graves-
and try to arrange with the tenant ; that the parties accord- end on his arrival. Such, howl"'ver, was not to he the ease.
ingly met on the estate on the following der, and looked at She came to England about that tLne, but not for the pur-
the timber, and they then proposed to adjourn to a public pose of meeting him. Mrs. Riles' and Mrs. Kearney, his
house; that as they went along the plaintiff told two aunts, were at Gravesend to me,'t him, and he went to
Rayner, in the deponent presence, that he (the reside at Hampstead, at the house of thn former lady. Mrs.
plaintiff) could manage the tenant better than Rayner, Kearney was at that time residing at i .alington, and the
and he would give him 151. a year for the estate. plaintiff, who had not yet seen his wife since e return, was
That deponent then told Rayner that he had spending an evening at her house, when Mrs. Roteon came
better close with the offer ; that the deponent then went to the door and inquired if Lieutenant Robson was there.
away, and in a short time returned; that Rayner had then Upon bring answered in the affirmative, she left her adeiSeas
agreed to sell the property to the plaintiff, and to meet him and went away. He followed her to the house where she
at the Six Bells. at Carmarthen, to settle the matter; that lodged. After so long an absence, he felt a disposition (as
it WY agreed that the mortgage should bo paid by the was natural) to forget and forgive what had taken place, and
plaintiff ; that the parties accordingly met at the Six he passed the night with his wife. Subsequently, however,
Bells ; that Rayner and the plaintiff, in the depo- she refused to occupy the same apartment with her
nest's presence and hearing, then agreed for the husband, and a great change was observed in her cou-
nties of the estate to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff agreed to duct towards him. About this time some information
pay off the mortgage, and to pay 151. a year for life to Ray- came to the husband's knowledge, which strongly excited his
ner ; that this agreement was reduced into writing • that suspicion, and induced him to seek for the cause of his
it was read over to Rayner and signed by him, and that it wife's flight to Italy, in some unhappy connexion she had
was signed by the deponent as a witness.) formed while left unprotected during his absence. He was
His honour then proe.eded to say, that as far as the evi- compelled to join his regiment at Chichester, and thither he
dence went, he saw no reason to doubt the accuracy of this requested his wife would follow him, but she refused, and in
statement. He saw no reason to doubt that Rayner agreed July, 184.5, she again went to Italy, thus putting an end to
to sell the property at that price to the plaintiff, and that he all his hopes of being re-united to her in this world. His
understood what he was doing. After this the plaintiff son friends then thought it right to institute inquiries into his
peered to have had possession of the property, to have paid wife's conduct whilst he was in India, and in course of time
interest to the mortgagee, to have rebuilt some of the build- circumstances were made known to them which proved that
Mg* on the property, and to have made some payments to an improper intimacy had existed between her and Mr.
Rayner on account of the annuity. This was in the interval Ruding. The learned counsel then proceeded to relate the
between the 2nd of March, 1838, and the month of April or events which, it was alleged, tended to fix the guilt upon
May, 1842, when Rayner'e property was assigned to twig- the defendant, and which will be found detailed below. He
nees under the Insolvent Debtors' Act. These persons had concluded by saying that the plaintiffs ultimate object in
then occupied the property for a period of four years. The ' bringing this action was to obtain a divorce, and he trusted
question was whether, under these circumstances, the plaintiff that the jury would, by their verdict, express their sympathy
could be treated as having acquired an ownership in this with his wrongs. They could not compensate him for the
property by this transaction. Considering the mode of his loss he had suffered in his peace and his honour, but
acquiring the knowledge of the property, considering the it was in their pqwer to say, that in their opinion the
circumstances of his introduction to it, coupled with some conduct of to defendant was entirely without excuse.
other facts, his honour wax satisfied that the burden of sup- Formal evidence was given to preys the marriaste of Miss
porting the contract lay upon the plaintiff, and that, what- Marian Middleton and Mr. Alexander Robson, and the deeds
ever the rule might be as to the evidence of value in ordinary of the marriage settlement were produced, showing that
cases, this was one of the cases in which demonstration of the Miss Middleton was a lady of fortune, and that the whole of'
value given was part of the burden thrown upon him who the property mentioned in the deeds belonged to her estate.
supported the contract. His honour was of opinion that of It was also proved, that at various periods between the
that burden the plaintiff had not discharsted himself; he was years 1839 and 1841, large sums of money had been paid to
of opinion that, upon the evidence, the plaintiff had not given Mrs. R.oluon out of the property, which, it appeared, she
the full value of the property. All that he had given was derived from her father, Major Middleton. These payments
the assumption of a liability to pay the mortgage for 5001, were made from the surplus of the plaintiff's moiety of his
to pay an arrear of interest on that mortgage, and wife's fortune, after defraying all the expenses of his coma
to pay an annuity of 151. for the life of Rayner, who up- mission and outfit.
peered to have been at that time at least 64 or 65 years old. Ellen Shadbolt, daughter of Mr. Shadbolt, one of the
The property was at this time let for 31/. Some of the wit- trustees under the settlement, was present at the marriage
news said less. Besides the rent paid, there was some of Mr. Roil on and Miss Marian Middleton, which took
timber upon the estate, which, as his honour had already place on the 12th Oct., 1837, in the parish church of Stoke
said, putting it at a low value, had at least the chance of Newington. Mrs. Riley, a enter of the plaintiff, was also
fetching 801. He would say nothing as to the contingencies there. After the marriage the young couple lived for a short
relating to some other property of Rayner. Assuming those time at Mrs. Kearney's.. They appeared much attached to
to he passed over, and this, the main property, the only each other at that time.—Cries examined Witness had
property to be attended to, he thought it imprint- never seen Miss Middleton before the marriage.
We to treat the consideration given for this property Colonel Dobbin. formerly in the 19th regiment —The
as being more than 6501., if so much; sad he thought it plaintiff's father was also of that me
n t,
nt. Ilwae wrelatedas ea-
dearly established, upon the evidence, that the property queinted with Mine Middleton,
who reg
wns in e y
was worth more than 6501. Assuming this to be, in to the Robsons. He was confidentially consulted by both
other respects, a case for specific performance, it was parties respecting pecuniary matters. Aftes the mar-
impossible to act upon the agreement. It was, however, enure, the plaintiff and his wife appeared to live together
said by the plaintiff's counsel, that the subject matter of the nn the most happy terms. After Mr. Robeen went to India,
contract was a concluded agreement, deficient only in its Mrs. Robson still continued to consult him upon her peeu-
formal parts, and which a court of equity was bound to en- niary affairs, and ,t was with 'ler concurrence that Mr.
force. His honour could not, under the circumstances, ae- Robson's lieutenancy was purchased. 2501. was the sum
cede to that argument, more especially, considering that paid for it, and out of Mr. Robson's moiety of his wife's pro-
the annuity was not secured in any way except upon an un- petty. A lieutenant on active service in India would have
dertaking. The matter, he thought, must be only considered very little money to spare out of his pay. At the request of
as resting in contract. The only remaining consideration Mr. and Mrs, Itotenn he called in Middleton-square, in
was, whether the conduct of the plaintiff and Renner, to- March. 1815, aft, r Mr. Robson had returned from India.
gather, especially having reference to Rayner'e insolvency, Mrs Robson was then living in Middleton square. Ile was
would be sufficient to bar Rayner from contesting the agree- not certain whether Mr. Robson was residing there or at
meet. His honour was of opinion that, under the eireum- Hampstead. Before his visit differences had arisen between
stances of the case, considering more particularly the plaintiff and his wife.—Cross examined: The plaintiff
the relative position of the plaintiff and Rayner. was an illegitimate child of Major Robson. Ile did not
the intervening time made no difference in the case. There- knew whether Mee. Robeen (formerly Miss Middleton) was
fore, upon this record, he could not give the plaintiff this legitimate or not. Mrs. It.neon was then living at the house
estate or enforce restitution at Lis suit. The injunctions of her husband's aunt at Hampstead. She certainly cora-
must be dissolved, and the plaintiff would have the option of plained of harsh treatment on the part of her husband. She
accepting the def,•ndant's offer or having his bill dismissed. said she had endeavoured to get away, and thut she had
'f he plaintiff elected to have the accounts taken in the mas- been detained. He tried all ke could to reconcile the husband
ter's office ; such accounts to be taken, without prejudice to and wife, hut he was unsuccessful. Mrs. Itobron declined
the plaintiff's right to appeal. joining her husband at Chichester Barracks, where his regi-
ment was then stationed. She said, „flow was it possible
COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, for any woman to join her husband sifter being accused of
Nisi Palm—Before Lord Denman and a Common Jury. having a child by another man ?" Witness heard afterwards
CARTYR V. CIIF.ARWELL ANN ANOTHER. RAILWAY that she bad gone to Milan.
OFFICES.—Mr. llugh Hill appeared for the plaintiff in this Colonel M'Donald: Knew the father of Mr. Robson for
case, who sought to recover the rent of certain offices which 20 years, and he was also acquainted with his son, the plain-
had been used by the promoters of the original North Kent tiff in this action. He had never men the plaintiff and his
Railway Company. The offices were taken by thedefendants wife together. He raw Mrs. Robson twice or thrice alter
under a written agreement in the usual form. Shortly after- her husband's departure.
wards, however, one of them wrote to the son of the plaintiff
Harriett Kearney said she was a sister of the late Major
to the r ffect that they intended their liability to continue only
Robson. He had also an unmarried sister. Ile died in
until the company should be formed.—Mr. Serjeant Allen
II hadmarriedsecond time. lie married
1836. enot
and Mr. Riddell, for the defendants contended, therefore,
Pat le the aunt of Mien Middleton, who was sent to this
that this letter was incorporated witrithe original agreement,
countryt' to he educated. Witness; was present at her mar-
and that as the company had been formed they were die-
ri with the plaintiff. She had been living with her aunt,
charged from all liability to the plaintiff for rent of the offices
theag ewidow of Major Robson, in apartments in Regent-street.
from the time at which the company was formed. The evi-
Min. Robson bad since married a Mr. Cox. After the mar-
dence, however, showed that the formation of the company
s risge of the plaintiff to Miss Middleton, they resided at her
had not proceeded further than the appointment of a prom
house for about three months, and they appeared devoted to
Fiona] committee, of which the plaintiffs son was a member'
each other. In January, 1838, they went ta live at the
and of the usual officers.—Curl Denman would not say that
house of Mr. Tynemouth, one of the trustees, and they re-
in law the letter was incorporated with the agreement. The
titled there until the month of July, in the same year.
jury must say what the terms were on which the offices had
During that time witness saw them frequently, and their at-
been originally taken. If the original agreement was that
ac t hrnent for each other seemed to continue unabated. They
the defendants should be discharged from their liability on
afterwards took apartments in the Edgeware road. In Oct.
the company being formed, they would say whether it had
1838 Mrs Itoteinn was delivered of a child—a little girl.
been formed and when. He thought it had not been formed. • . .
She and her husband appeared very much attached to it.
If the original agreement was not such as he had just awn.
The affection between the o young couple " continued to
tinned the written agreement was conclusive. The jury at
exist down to the time of Mr. Itobson's departure for India.
once returned a verdict for the p'aintiff for the full amount.
Witness received from Mrs. Robson the letter produced,
giving an account of her lest interview with her husband.
At that time witneee's house was open to receive Mrs. Rob-
son, if she thought fit to take up her residence there, Jut she
did not avail herself of the opportunity. In Nov., 1841,
Mrs. Robson called upon her to say she was going to Italy.
She then lost sight of her until the plaintiff returned
to England in March, 1815. Mr. Itelnon took up his abode
at Hampstead, at the house of Mrs. Riley, his aunt. Wit-
ness was living at Islington. She remembered the plaintiff
being at her house one evening, and he hail not seen his wife
at that time. They were about to sit down to supper when
a knock was heard at the door. On the door being opened,
Mrs. Robson made her appearance, hut she wauld not come
in. She left her addrees and went away. Witness after-
wards drank tea in Myddelton-square with the plaintiff and
his wife. She then &nerved a r hange in the manner of
Mrs. Robson, particularly when she dunked up in her hus-
band's face and said, " Are you not going to Hampstead,
Alexander ?" He appeared very much distressed for an
answer, and did not remain with his wire that night. Mrs.
Robson afterwards went to live with him at Hampstead, but
they did not occupy the same chamber, and their whole
manner was changed. Her husband afterwards went to
join his regiment at Chichester. Witness had never heard.
of Mr. Ruding's name until this question arose—Cross-
examined: Miss Middleton, at the time of her marriage,
was 18 years old, and the plaintiff was of the same age. The
plaintiff was entirely dependent upon his relations, and had
no money himself to purchase his commission. Witness had,
formerly carried on the Imeinessi of a milliner in Maddox-
street, Regent-street. When Miss Middleton came to wit-
ness's house, she knew that she had clandestinely left Mrs.
Robe-nes Mrs. Robson told her afterwards, and when Miss
Middleton was in her house, that she (Miss M.) had left her,
but she did not acknowledge that she was under her roof.
At that very time the banns were in the 'course cf publica-
tion at Stoke Newington. Miss Middleton was a Roman.
Catholic. Mr, Robson wan nnt. Witness was to receive
80/. a year for their board and lodging.
Capt. Blair, of the 3rd Buffs: When Mr Robson joined
that regiment, it was at Meerut, in India. He joined in the
year 1839, as ensign. Ile eould not spare any of his income
so an ensign whilst the regiment was marching and oeunter-
marching. His pay was about 201. a month, and when be
was appointed lieutenant, it was increased to 261. a month.
The regiment was stationed about 1,000 miles from Calcutta,
in the year 1840. He recollected the plaintiff's obtaining
leave of absence for six months, in order that he might go to
Calcutta to meet his wife.—Cross-examined There were
several married officers in the regiment with their wives.
Mary Ann Green, wife of Matthew Wm. Green. raiwd, thatass-
in 1839, she was living at No. 10, Portman-place, Edge
road. Mts. Robson at that time came to lodge with her.
She then had an infant. Witness was to receive 501. a year
for her board end lodging. About six weeks afterwards,
Mr. Robson left England. Wheelie and her husband accom-
panied Mrs. Robson to Chatham to take leave of Mr. Rob-
son. They manifested a strong affection for each other. Mrs.
Robson continued to reside with her until June 1840. During
that time the child died—viz., in February. Men. Robson.
did not go much into society. Mrs. Robsonsi left her to go
to live with Mrs. Reamer. During her redence at wit
ness's house, she had never Keen Mr. Butting there.
In
Jan. 1841, Mrs. Robson again came
took the first floor, consisting of a sitting
ortl-roors and bed-room.
as
communicating by folding doors. Shy afterwards,
gentleman, named Ruding, tame to visit her ahout twice a.
week. He generally came in the evening, and often took
tea with her. She (witness) never knew-the hour when he
left. Witness generally went to, bed about eleven o'clock,
and she never knew him leave before that hour. Her sitting-
room was under Mrs. Robson's bed-room. She might have
heard the footsteps of a man in Mrs. Robson's bed-room,
but she did not recollect it. She had not seta Mr. Ruding
since the year 1844. A fortnight ago, she received a com-
munication by post, from the defendant's solicitor upon
the subject of this action ; but she bad not spoken to any-
body about it. In the month of June, 1841, Mrs. Robson
was taken very ill in the night time. Before that 'time, she
had observed in Mrs. Reboots indications of pregnancy, but
she had never made any remark upon the subject. Witness
had been confined a short time previously, and a woman
named Little was her nurse. Mr. Peede was the medical
TLISA wh attended Mrs. Robson. The doetor
sent for at two o'clock in the morning. She did
not recollect a gentleman named Ruding calling
that morning. She had never seen him go into
Mrs. Robson's room. She remembered Mrs. Robson
having a fainting fit, and Mr. Finding assisted witness and
the servant in undressing her and putting her into bed
rr
also procured medicine for her. He called n
christian name " Marian," but witness did es
esinarke

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.—Gettnitetts
Nest Num.—Before Mr. Justice Coltman and a special jury.
Roasoar v. Runtgo.—Cato. Cos.—Mr. Serjeant Tal-
foiled, Mr. Serjeant Wilkins, and Mr. Bovill for the plain-
tiff; Sir F. Thesiger, Mr. Serjeant Channel], and Mr. I'hinn
for the defendant.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff against the de-
fendant to recover compensation in damages for an alleged
criminal conversation with his (the plaintiffs) wife.
Mr. Serjeant Talfourd, in opening the case, said it was his
duty to lay before the jury the circumstances under which
the plaintiff claimed, at their hands, redress for the injury he
had sustained, by reason of the severance of that tie which
he fondly hoped would have existed between him and his
wife throughout their lives. The plaintiff was an officer in
the 3rd Regiment of Buffs ; and the defendant was a mer-
chant earryieg on business at Salvador Howie, Biehopegate,
and residing in Nottingham-street, New Road. He was a
man somewhat advanced in life, and the father of several
children. The father of the plaintiff had been a major in the
19th Regiment of Infantry ; and having retired on half pay,
took up his residence at Watton-on Thames. Ile was at
that time the father of three children, who had the misfor-
tune to lose their mother in early life. There it was
that the wife of the plaintiff, being. then a girl sent
from India for her education, was first introduced into the
family ; and an attachment arose between the plaintiff and
that young lady. Miss Middleton, which subsequently led to
their union. Major Robson, the father of the plaintiff, died
in the year 1836, and Miss Middleton, who had also lost her
parents, very naturally went to reside with the major'', mother,
who was then residing at Stoke Newington with her
daughter, Mrs. Kearney. Miss Middleton was entitled to
some property, the amount of which was at that time uncer-
tain, but which he (Mr. Serjeant Talfourd) believed to be
about 3,0001. The ladies with whom she was living having
sanctioned her union with young Alexander Robwm, the
military friends of Major Robson were consulted upon the
subject, as to the measures to be adopted respecting the
young lady's property. They gave their advice, which was
afterwards acted upon in a marriage settlement, dated Oct
10, 1837. By this deed a moiety of 1,600/. was settled upon
Mies Middleton, and the remainder left as a fund at the dis-
posal. of young Alexander Rolston for purchasing a commis-
sion in the army and advancing him in life. On the 12th
Oct., 1837, the young lady was married to the plaintiff in the
presence of Mrs. Kearney and some other friends, with the
sanction of those who were well acquainted with their res-
pective tempers, and could form a judgment as to the propriety
'bf the match. After taking some little tour, toe young
couple returned to London, and found an asylum in the house
of Mrs. Robson (the plaintiff's mother), where they resided
for about three months. They afterwards went to live with
Mr. Tynemouth, one of the trustees under the marriage set-
tlement. They resided there for several months, until a dif-
ference arose between them and Mr. Tynemouth, which
induced them to take apartments elsewhere. They then
went to live at the house of a Mr. Green, in Portman-place,
Edgeware-road ; and in Oct. 1838, about a year after the
marriage, a daughter blessed their union. the child was
happily now removed from this world. An ensign's commis-
sion had now been purchased for the plaintiff, and the funds
fir that commission were provided out of the fortune of Miss
Middleton, his wife. The time having arrived for the plain-
tiff's departure to join his regiment in India, it became neces-
sary that the young people should be separated before they
had attained totb e age of 21 years. It was not coneidered
advisable that Mrs. Robson should accompany her husband
to India, and accordingly it was agreed that the young lady
should remain with her friends in England. In the
month of February, 1839, young Mr. Robson was quar-
tered with his regiment at Chatham, where he remained
for some sh.ort time preparatory to his departure. His wife
there took an affectionate leave of him, and afterwards the
plaintiff wrote several letters to his aunt Mrs. Kearney,
giving an account of their parting, and breathing the purest
sentiv_tents of love and attachment. (The learned counsel
here read the letters.) In due time the plaintiff arrived at
Caltutta, and from thence he went with his regiment to
M eerut, where he was stationed for a considerable time, and
!whilst there he wrote constantly to his wife, to induce her to
join him in India. It was ultimately arranged that she
should follow him to India, and the plaintiff had adopted
means for introducing her to some friends upon her arrival.
He executed a power of attorney, by which she received a
bill for 2791. or 2801. from his agent in England. He ob-
tained six months' leave of absence, in order that he might
awaited her her at Calcutta and conduct her to his reaiment.
arrival at Calcutta, and at last be discovered, by
a letter which had been forwarded to the post-office, that she
had changed her mind, and that she did not think fit to joine
him in India. His d' sof cluree excd-
ingly bitter. After a
sun, to find that his'
to dspirit the stout __
him, and again disappointed

1