The Express.
London, England, 1850-04-03 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, WEDNESDAY EVENING, APRIL 3, 1850.

action was brought to resovee damages for criminal iseaver-
satien with the elaititill's wife. The demurs were laid at
1,0081. The defendant pleaded "not gu ;" and secondly,
that " the said Elisabeth Cloths" was not the wife of the
plaintiff.
William Mercer, baker, Heise in Smallbrook-street, was
present at the marriage of plaintiff with his sezon.l wife, sod
was married at the same time ; the marriages were made at
Handsweeth Chat& in May, 1843. The plaintiff was than*
32 then, and his wife about 20 or 21. They appeared always
to live happily, and had three children by their marriage.
Clarke was • good husband ; bat busbies* obliged him to be
frequently from home.
William Eden was servant to plaintiff, from Michaelmas,
1848 to 1843. He lived in Pock.laue. This witness was
ersatined at great length, and proved the friendship exist-
inbetween the plaintiff sad Page, and that the latter kept
• large ion, called the Grand Turk, in Bell street ; they had
many bill transactions. Had seen Page cling rood Mrs.
Clarke, and kiss her in her husband's absence.
By the Judge-81e dui not ream or complain.
Esamination eontinutd—They did it often, and In wh-
ims' pretence. This was continued up to 1849, and about
the latter part of his time there, it went on "stronger and
stronger." (Laughter.} Witness was in bed from an accident
in the summer of 1846, and Page and his mist:tee
west up stairs to see him. They went down stairs
as ler 'sibs first fleas, sad witness thought he heard Page
stop at his master's bedroom, and that kis mistress went
down the other 8 ght and came softly up again. In about
awe minutes he saw them both come out of the bed-room,
the door of which bad been shut. H. found at another
period Me.. Clarke and Page in the pantry ; when they
ease out his mistress "looked very red, and her hair was
straggled about her face." Mentioned these and other
things to Mr. Clarke a few weeks ago. He was • very kind
husband and • good master.
Cross examined—Witnws had known the plaintiff to
quarrel with his wife, who would " claw at him," but he
never atrack her ; be would get out of the toad. Hie wife
would be cross with him for being late at his club, when she
had been out all the time with Mr. Page. Witness has •
house of hie own, bat had not let a room for en hour or two.
Had been a pr:zefighter since he left Clarke.
Mary Ann Bates, daughter of a milkman, proved the deli-
, very of a note from Mrs. Clarke to the defendant.
Mary Gregory, wits of J Imes Gregory, bricklayer, spoke
to having seen, about two and a half years ago, Mr. Page
and Mrs. Clarke go into the passage, and heard them kissing
but did not know if defendant kissed Mrs. Clarke, or she
hisa. _ _

Crom-eximined—Wu • witness at the County Court
when an action was bit( ure.t for board for Mrs. Clarke, and
adultery was pleaded. Bne left the hoses as soon as she saw
defendant kiwi Mrs. Clarke, which she thrusght prudent to
do. She did not lay herself open to being kissed by strangers,
but was not afraid of an attack on herself.
Mary Toy, daughter of Germs Toy. wheclwright. aged
18, was in the service of Mr. Clarke in 1848. Mr. Clarke
was eery kind to his wife. Rensemhered Mrs. Clarks ant
Mr. Prim peeing into the front purlieu, where the candle
had been put out ; they remained a quarter of an hoar.
When Mrs. Clarke was in bed one day, she told witness
to say she was very poorly, and if Mr. or Mrs. Page
came, they were to go up. Mrs. Clarke then
undressed and went to bed, and Mr. Page came in about an
hour, and asked her where "Betsey " (Mrs. Clarke) woo?
and, upon being told, be went to the bottom of the stairs,
and Mrs. Clarke said, if he wanted to see her he must go up,
which he did, and remained about a quarter of an hour.
Was once set to watch at the front door when Psge was
there. They were in the parlour, the doer of which was
half open. (Witness described the position of the parties;
no doubt c.uld, if that description were trite, be entertained
of their guilt.) The neat day witacas told her mother, and
she left As service in a month.

la cross examincion it war endeavoured to be proved
that witness could not see the parties if she had been where
she said and they in the corner of the room mentioned.
Tae front door was open. Too re was a window in the par
boar locking into the street. Any person coal,' look into
the roam trona the street, and could hare seen the potties in
the corner if they had looked particularly. She thought
them very familiar, bat did not tell her master then.
Ann !tigers—Saw Mr. Page kissing Mrs. Clarke. He is
• married man, with a family. This was in an open space
of ground near Mr. Clarke's Image one night.

Mr. Miller addressed the jolty for the defendant, contend-
ing that the CABO fur the plaictitf disci aed no evict, nce in
stilipm of the statement that Mrs. C.arke hal a•tempted to
demi°, herself; it was impossible he could call witnesses t 3
rebut the foul imputation east upon his client; and he would
'4 the jury if it rare possible tor such an intercourse to
have taken place in the open manner.described ; or that the
parties should have invited public attention to their gross
misconduct, had such taken place. Pirs.ns in this " pure
district" of Peck-lane telt a kind of tame,—which
he should call infasay,--and looked upon themselves
as heroes if they cams to War•icr and gave evidence in
asses of this groin nature : and if the jury referred to all the
eases of this kind, they would always find a host of witnesses
ready to swear to alleged acts of adultery, which it was im-
passible fee a defendant to contradict. Fle appealed to their
ju 'went, and stu.till they be satisfied of the both el
these statements, he nought the Last possible amount of
damage would satisfy the plaintiff for to* " loss" he had
netaia' ad of sub a woman.
_ .

liteLord•bip, in summing up, said he could see no Intl uta
tion that could be ream ably cast on the character or conduct
of the plaintiff, nog did it appear, it there had been house I 01
a bad desniption in Perk-latv, that the plaintiff had gone
twat them ; he seemed to have been a good husband and a
good lather. Tne evidence to show ill treatment to the wile
had entirely failed, and it the jury were of o,iition that the
defendant had reduced that woman to such a state of gross
profligacy, then be was answerable for the deep degrada•iou
to which he had reduced her. After referriag to some
points of the evidence Mating to the pir.ies being to-
gether in the bedroom, hie I.rdship maid it might be in-
ferred that partite going lots a bedroom in the
hisoner described by the secrnd witness, had committed an
act of adultery, because the learned doctors iu another court,
where they were more acquaiated with these kind of casco,
held, that if a man and a woman, under those suspieious
circumstances, go into a bid room tolfetLer, they did
sot go to say their Pater Dover, but formate other purpose.
llis I.,rdship cinsidere I too ....taints of the girl Toy conclu-
sive it the jury believed it.
Toe jury ratuznel a verdict for the plaintiff, da-
mages 6111.