The Express.
London, England, 1866-06-21 00:00:00

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.7-Jusz. 20.

- - - -- - - - -
After Term Niei Prins Sittings Mt Westminster.—(Before
the Lord Chief Justice and Special Juries.)

O'DONOVA2I v. FLOOD AND WIFIL

In this cue, after our report left yesterday,
Mr. Chambers in addressing the jury for the defend-
ant, said the facia of the cue had been mistaken from the
beginning to the end. Mrs. Flood never had slandered, and
never intended to slander the plaintiff ; and he should
call her, to give her account of the matter. She believed
at the time that Mr. O'Donovan was another person.
Mrs. Flood deposed that she did not know Mr. John
O'Donovan, the plaintiff. She never heard or saw any-
thing of him before she went to lodge at Mrs. Bishop's. A
gentleman she knew (the son of a general officer) played
the same music as the plaintiff, and that was why she
asked Mrs. Bishop who he was. Mn. Bishop said be was
Mr. Donovan, and not O'Donovan, because that
made a great difference in families. She was
related to the O'Donovan. Some time afterwards,
when the plaintiff was playing, she asked Mrs.
Lee if she was sure it was Mr. Donovan, because, from the
music he played, she thought he was a gentleman abe knew
intimately some years ago : from his playing, not having
seen him, she was under the impression that he was her
friend. Mrs. Lee said yes, he was a Mr. Donovan, from
Ireland. She denied most emphatically the slanderous
words imputed to her. It was a fabrication of a low mind.
She could not hive imagined such things. She never said
the plaintiff was passing under an assumed name. One day
when she saw the plaintiff coming in she said he was
not the gentleman she took him to be. She men-
tioned jewellery once. Mrs. Lee admired her ring, and
said Mr. Donovan was fond of wearing jewellery ; and
witness replied that her friend, who she at first mistook
plaintiff to be, was also fond of wearing jewellery.
Cross-examined—She never slandered any one, and the
story of Mrs. Bishop and Mrs. Lee was a pure invention.
His appearance was very much like the gentleman's she re-
ferred to. It was twelve years since she saw her friend.
Mrs. Lee frequently told her anecdotes of Mr. O'Donovan.
Mr. Hawkins—Were the anecdotes of Mr. O'Donovan
similar to those of your old friend! (Laughter.)
Witness—No ; it was about the proceediugs before the
Master of the Rolls.

Mr. Hawkins—Were there any incidents in the anecdotes
of the life of Mr. O'Donovan similar to those of your old
friend

'Witness— o.
Mr. Haskins—Then the music and the person of Mr.
O'Donovan were something like your old friend's, but not
the incidents? . .

Witness—Yes. There was a mystery about the plaintiff.
They had been unable to make out his family, or where he
came from. . . -

Mr. Hawkins—Did it ever occur to you to apply to Lord
Fermoy about him?
Witness—Yes. But we did not get an answer from
him.
By the Lord Chief Justice—l never knew that any of
my acquaintances bed committed forgery. I have been at
Baden Baden. I never advanced money to anyone at
Baden, or anywhere else, to get him out of prison. I saw
the announcement of the death of Mrs. Maitland, and I
might have shown it to Km. Lee or Mrs. Bishop. I said
she was the aunt of the gentleman I had known. It was
about the time that I was under the impression Mr.
O'Donovan we that gentleman. They did not afterwards
undeceive me in the mistake I had made.
Mn. Hawkes, who was examined for the plaintiff, was
recalled. She said that Mrs. Lee and Mrs. Bishop did
not mention the matter to her until after Captain and
Kra. Flood had left, and a day or two before Mr.
O'Donovan left Brighton. She did not then credit the