The Express.
London, England, 1866-12-11 00:00:00

BAIL COURT.—Dzc. 10.

- - - -
After Term Nisi Prius gs at .—(Before
Mr. Justice Bhee mad Common Juries.)

RANSOM v. RAUTON.-ALLEGED SEDUCTION.
(Concluded from yesterday's Express).
After lunch the further hearing of the case was con-
tinued in the Court of Common Pleas in consequence of
the insufferable state of the Bsil Court from its over•

crowding.
Joseph Hinton, known as " The General " was next
called. His appearance in the box, from his di-
minutive size and boyish appearance, caused ex-
pressions of surprise from the audience. He said I
Next August I shall be sixteen years of age.
know Bewley Ranson. In the summer of 1864 I was at
my grardmother'• She always goes to bed about three
o'clock. I was in the garden with Ramsey Ranson. (The
witness then detailed the diagnsang conduct that took
place between them both in the garden and the house,
such as has never been detailed in a court of justice
within the recollection of the oldest member of the bar or
officer of the court.) The witness exhibited an amount
of youthful depravity which it is impossible to conceive.
He gave his evidence as if it was a capital joke, laughing
as the questions were put to him and he gave his answers.
His shoulders just reached the top of the witness box.)
Joseph Wade—l am a thatcher, cousin to Win. Wade.
I met George Hinton near the defendant's house one
evening, and we watched Remy Ranson and Geo. Pea-
-1 cocke's conduct. (Witness described what took place.)
Where he saw them was about 100 yards from her father's
house, and 6 or 7 yards from the defendant's house.
Ann Holland—l am a servant living at the Ashley
Plough public-house. I was at Mrs. Rump's sonic time
before last Christmas. Elizabeth came home one night
about half-pas
seven o'clock from Newmarket, Her
dress on that occasion was dirty round the bottom,
and she took it off, washed it, and dried it in the mom
where I Was at work. The remainder of her evidence was
objected to and not pressed.
This was the defendant's case.
Mr. 11. Chambers proposed to call evidence to show the
girl's general good conduct in answer to the evidence that
had been produced against her on the part of the de-
fendant.
Mr. O'Malley objected, and after some argument Mr.
Chambers withdrew his proposition.
Mr. O'Malley, in addressing the jury, said that nothing
was more painful to counsel than to have to wade through
the filthiness of a case such as this, and which was not
diminished in the least degree by the ready greeting which
avowals of the most shameless description elicited some-
times from a portion of the nadieroe who attend courts of
justice. The question, however, was not what the filthiness
of the case might be, or what early depravity it might
reveal that existed in Bowe rural districts, but whether
the defendant, who was a man in a respectable position,
and engaged for a long time to be married, was through
false delicacy and tenderness for the reputation of one
who had made a false charge against him to suffer himself
to be made the victim here and to be adjudged
by them guilty of that of which he knew be never
was guilty, and of which he bad most solemnly
sworn he never was guilty. The parties were all rela-
tions ; the same family . tie bound the witnesses
and it was a remarkable circumstance that the views of
the family, which was not without its import, were in
favour of the defendant and not of the plaintiff. The facts
detailed by the boys had been given with that boyish sim-
plicity which the learned counsel for the plaintiff had been
unable to shake. A point had been made against the de-
fendant that be was a betting man. Now that was not the
case • but even if he were so, and was the friend of jockeys
and 'trainers, be hoped that would not render him un-
worthy of belief. From prime ministers downwards—he
would not my bishops or judges—(laughter)—society had
been addicted to it, but be hoped it would not be con-
sidered by them that to be contaminated in that way, if it
could be considered so, made a man unworthy of belief in
a court of justice. This WY a felony if anythtng; and could
anyone doubt that with this evidence the defendant would
have been acquitted upon such a charge ? Could they,
therefore, fail to give him a verdict in this action.
Mr. Chambers then, at considerable length, replied on
the whole case. The charge against the defendant was
probable and possible, or, if not, medical evidence would
have been called to show its impossibility. Finished vice
was capable of availing itself of every opportunity and place
of attacking innocence, and ruining unprotected virtue.
The defendant had been guilty of conduct towards this
poor girl which unfortunately was too often practised
towards females of tender years.
The learned Judge, in summing up, said that no doubt
it would be impossible, or next to impotaible, for any jury
on this evidence to convict the de.endarl of rape. It
might very well be that a young woman attacked
in this way resisted, struggled, and screamed, and yet,
after all, yielded. The great probability would be that
if she had been attacked in this way she would have told
her mother when she came home, instead of going to his
mother's house. She was not confirmed in any one mate-
rial circumstance of what happened on that occasion. She
made no suggestion to any one that the defendant had so
assaulted her until she was in the family way. The child,
however, was born nine months from the time when she
said the offence was committed. The evidence that she
was of a loose and abandoned character, if they believed it,
must have an effect on the reliance they could place upon
her statement. The learned judge having greatly con-
demned the profligacy which the case bed developed,
The jui y were locked up at 6 o'clock. They, at 8 o'clock,
sent to say there was not the least chance of their agrreing
to a verdict. The learned judge declined to discharge
them before 10 o'clock. should they not agree in the mean-
time. As no agreement had been come to at that time,
the jury were ultimately discharged.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.—DEc. 10.
Sittings at Nisi Prius in London.—(Before Lord Chief
Justice Bosill and a Special Jury.)
POTTER AND OTBIBS V. RANKIN. . _ .

This was an action upon a policy of insurance for 4,000/.
upon the freight of the ship Sr W. Eyre, which was to
go to New Zealand, thence to Calcutta, and afterwards
home to Liverpool. At New Zealand the vessel got
aground more than once ; but she was believed to be not
very seriously damaged, and she went to Calcutta. There
she underwent a thorough exarnination,and the conclusion
arrived at was that it would cost more to repair her than
she would be worth when repaired, and therefore the un-
derwriters were served with notice of abandonment. While
correspondence upon this state of matters was going on
the ship was struck by the cyclone that happened in
October, 1i364, and wrecked. The question now was
whether the ship had been so injured that the damage
amounted to a constructive total loss.
Sir G. Honyman, Q.C., Mr. Hannen, and Mr. Langdon
appeared for the plaintiffs ; Mr. Edward James, Q.C., Mr.
Mellish, Q.C., and Mr. Cohen for the defendant.
The case will be a long one ; and the opening speech and
the examination of the captain occupied the whole of
the day.