The Express.
London, England, 1851-12-04 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.-YESTERDAY.

Clair Jt,nca

Nsu rams is Ntoexese....
JARVIS AND • hPICIAL
SOMERS O. ASPINWALL.—SEDUCTION.
This case was partly heard yesterday, and it will be re-
membered that it was founded upon an instrument purport-
ing to be signed by the late Mr. Aspinwall, and binding
him to pay 501. a year to support his three illegitimate chil-
dren, of which the plaintiff was mother.
This morning the hearing of the case was resumed by it
being proposed to examine Mrs. Aspinwall as to the state of
her husband's affairs at the date of the instrument, but Ins
lordship ruled that such questions could nut be put, and nu
ether witness was called.
Mr. Serjeant Byles then replied, and urged upon the
Jury that they started upon the consideration of this Case
with two facts clear, that these were Mr. Aspinwall'e
elsildren, and that no imputation could be made upon the
plaintiff except in so far as her character had been ruined
by Mr. Aspinwall. It was also clear that SJJ. ay. or had
bees allowed to the plaintiff us long as Mr. Aspinwull
and this frequent applications had been. :mule to him to
MAO NUM permanent prevail in fur her. *the plaintiff pro-
emial an instrument carrying out such an intention, and
two RIIRDWRI Ware that they U. Lim sign it. liis
learned brother Wilkins said in effect, I charge those
witnesses with perjury, forgery, and conspiracy," and lie
asked the jury to brand them with those imputations.
But upon what evidence ? It was said that the deceased
invariably abbreviated his Christ:an name, whilst to this do-
cument it was in full. But the plaintiff Ineught inn, court the
most solemn instrument he ever executed—his will; and to
that his name was put in full. Next, it was said that he never
commenced his surname with the proper e,pital A, but
with a round A made large. Now, he had had the
curiosity to look at the jury panel, and ho found that
there were several gentlemen on the jury whose Christian
names commenced with A, and he pat it to their expe-
rience whether they had not sometimes written that letter
the one way and sometimes the other ? Again, it was said
that this signature was not genuine, but was an imita-
tion; but, if this were so, then a genuine signature had
been imitated, • according to the dell.nilant's eye ;
and if there had been such an imitation, the A would have
been an ordinary capital, and the Christian name would
have been :written in full. He also submitted to them
that the document itself contained strong internal evidence
of its genuineness, and he concluded by imploring them to
consider meet carefully before they gave a verdict for the
defendant and fixed upon the witnesses to the document
is question the serious charge, to which he had referred.
The Chief Justice then summed up, and committed to the
consideration of the jury this painful and, according to his
view, most serious and difficult case. During the whole
course of his experience lie had rarely heard a case pre.
suited in a manner more calculated to enlist 'their sympa-
thies or to impress their reason than this hart been by the
learned *engem% who had just sat down—a speech in which
every conceivable point in the case had been touched upon.
Thu only question, however, for them was "14e, or
no; wu this paper signed by Mr. Aspinwall?' The
mare able the speech of the learned counsel, the more
athetrame his duty to make to them the observations which
amparred to his own mind upon the subject. His lordship
I then went through the evidence, and remarked upon the
I extraordinary statement that this agreement bad been
kept secret, even until after the action was brought ; and
it did not appear even that Mr. Haynes, tke then attorney
I of the plaintiff, knew of it.
Mr. Haynes—My Lord, I knew of that agreement ift
May.
The Chief Justice said it was improper to interrupt at
this stage of the proceedings, and he was of opinion that
the jury ought not to pay any attention to what Mr.
Haynes had said, but to look only to the evidence. His
lordship then analysed the evidence, and left the whole
cue for the consideration of the jury, and charged them to
decide it without reference to the consequences.
The jury left the court at half-past twelve to consider
the matter, and.nt half-past four o'clock they returned and
stated that there was no likelihood of their agreeing, they
differed on every point.
TM Chief Justice said it was a great pity, for the parties
boss put to berry expenses, and be had no power to
iththargethe jury except by consent.
Mr. Sall and Mr. Brown, the junior counsel in the ease,
NM they would leave the matter entirely in the hands of
the court.
The Chief Justice said ho would see the learned counsel
in his private room, and, having done so, he came into
court and said that, under sil the circumstances he would
discharge the jury; and they were accordingly discharged
without heving_given a verdict.
BIGNRLL 0. 10DDT.—THI CARD CURATINO CASE AT
Swanton. _ _

This was an action to recover the sum of 1501. deposited
by the plaintiff with the defendant, to indemnify him as
bail (or Nottidge, who was committed for perjury in con-
nexion with the card cheating case at Brighton. The de-
fence wee that the money was deposited with the defendant
to enable him to swear that he was worth the amount fur
which he was to be bail, suit that this agreement being an
illegal one, the money could not be recovered.
Mr. Serjeant Wilkins opened the ease, and said that the
plaintiff was joiut leave of the Argyle Room, in (treat
Windmill-street, which were now let to M. Laurent fur his
Casino. Mr. iottidgc was cook at this estallehment, and
when Staden was committed at Brighton, be offered hdl
fur him, but the result was that he himself was committed
fur perjury. The plaintiff thereupon pot Mr. Putter end
the defendant as bail fur him, and he deposited with
the defendant 2.501. to indemnify him. Thu defen-
dant had been bootmaker to the plaintiff fur some
time, and it happened in consequence of this being
so that he was asked to became bail. The defen-
dant would say that the 2501. was given to him to enable
him to swear that be was worth 2.501., but this was not so,
for they would hear that the defendant represented to the
plaintiff that he was worth more than that of his own
property. The fact, however, turned out to be that
Mr. Potter's bail was taken for 60W. instead of
he and the debarking being bail for 2401. each, and under
these eireaniatemees mom should have been returned.
Only lb& of this way kievareer, had been given back, and
it was far be balance that tbe_gesment action was brought.
Mr. Aadeseon said that is Imber last he went with
the plaintiff to the defendant, who was a bootmaker in
Peaderstetreeit. Mr. Bignell asked Mr. Paddy if he was in ,
a polities to bail a man, if he was worth Z5O/., and he said
he was. He said that the lease of his house had been
waiting for him to sign for a week, his house was furnished,
one door was let for (witness thought) U. Ss. a week,
and even his book debts were worth much more than that.
! Mr. Bignell then asked him if he would bail a
a person for him and he said he did not know. Mr. Big-
. sell said ..Iknow what yes mean, I will indemnify you "