The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1804-12-04 00:00:00

LAM:

• CRIM. CON.
GEORGE CHAMBERS, ESQ.

00 5 KS
CAPT. CAULFIgf.D.

tad
.
t•

COURT or KING'. BE NCI I, WEiTNIINSI ILR, Der. 3
Sittiags al Nisi Priors, &tore Lord EL Latiao ROUGH.

This was an action to recover damages against the
Defendant, for Criminl Conversation with thy:
Plaintiff's wife. The damages were laid at TEN
VIOUSAND POUNDS.

Mr. Eareitie stated the case on the part of t' e
Plaintiff, nearly as follows :
e My Lord, cad Gewtlonch e(tLc Jall,
" The Plaintiff in. this case, Mr. George Cham-
bers, is the son of the late Sir William Chambers,
who was an eminent archited, and a Gentleman of
considerable fortune. In the year 1781, the Plaint-
iff married the daughter of the noble and cele-
honed Lord Rodney : at that time they were
both at the age of eighteen; and, in consequence of a
mutual attachment, had taken a trip to the north,
where they were clandestinely married ; they were
alarwards pnbliely married with the usual ceremo-
nies, and with the consent of their friends. They
bad issue of this marriage nine children, eight boys
end one girl. Mrs. Chambers was a lady moss
beautiful and accomplished, as elegant in tier per-
son as fascinating in her manners, and is at this day
as lovely and bewitching as ever. The Defendant
is a young gentlemen, an officer in the army, of a
good figure, remarkably handsome, and very much
addifted to theatrical performances, and, mixing
much in the gay world, was considered a man
of gallantry. The first time he unfortunately
met the Plaintiff's wife was at a ball at Huntington,
where he darted with her, and paid her some att n-
tioe:: from this time her coneetet altered : soon atter
Mr. Chambers oUserved a considerable change in
her manners, and several disputes arose between
them ; at this instant he confesses he has no reason
to believe she had ever violated his bed with any
other man than the Defendant. After this a scuffle
ensued about a lett& which caused a separation;
but the Plaintiff', fend of her to a degree, for who
can live with her and not love her, desired to be re-
united to her. He was at this time called away wit',
his regiment to the siege of the Held•', under the
command of His Royal Highness Duke of York, bee
from ill health,he was obliged to return much sooner
than he otherwise would have dnue. On hi ar-
rival at his own house, Mrs. t'llamlsers an,
alarmed, and, in u'uth, her affections by this time
were completely alienated from him ; the moment
of his return she lett his house, with an infant t nly
seven months old. Since that time she has pill,-
hely cohabited with the Defendant. I will not here
enlarge upon the dreadful consequences which ge.
aerially follow the violation of the marriage vow :
I will not observe upon the magnitude of the
offence, or the aggravations attendant upon it, as I
was accustomed to do in my early practice at the
Bar. I shall content myself at present with this
one observation, that unless the Deter dant can alter
the case, by shewing that the Plaintiff is not
intitled to any compensation at your hands, and
this can only be done by testimony ; I shall expeet
such damages as you will be inclined to pronounce.
Whatever evidence they have to offer, I shall hear
; and. mei shall have that pi ivilege, will take up
a few moments of your time, by remarking upon it.
Mrs. Cotton, the sister to the Pleintiff, was then
called ; she stated, that she was present at the cele-
bration of the marriage of the Plaintiff 40.1 his wife,
at the parish church of Cr eel, in the County of
Durham, on the I^:h of September, 1781.
The Rev. John lValker stated, that he was tutor
to Mr. Chambers's children, fur eight years; he
lodged in the neighbourhood, and occasionally
dined with the family, once a week or so; at first,
he had but two pupils. but afterwards seven or
eght : at that time the family resided at ilertford,
and lived for several years happily and comfortably
t sgether ; he left them about Midsummer, two years
ago, and recollecled Mr. Chambers quitting his own
horse, to join his regiment on the Continent; any
thing further, he could only relate from hearsay.
Oa his cross-examination by Mr. Genes, he said
to had never witnessed any disagreements between
them ; he knew they did net live together for some
time. While Mr. Chambers was absent abroad,
Mrs. C. went do•.cn to Hartford to see the children:
he returned before the expedition was over; but as
I e was nor in the house, he could not speak to any
thing particularly. He had seen the Miss Rodneys,
Mrs. C.'s sisters, there, several times.
Mrs. Mary Liddk was examined by Mr.
Easel:4e ; she stated, that she had lived in the
service of the Plaintiff and his wife, from the year
1797 to 1602, and had the care of the children, and
►ept the household accounts ; they appeared to live
very happy, and Mrs. C. was apparently attentive
and affectionate to the children. She first observed
an alteration in leer manners towards her husband
aid family, in the year 1;98. At that time she
arced a great deal with other gentlemen, and was
• ores absent from home. No fact came to
'mess's knowledge until the year MI, on which
she could build a y suspicions; the Defendant
a'oont that period began to visit at Hartford ; he
was frequently there when the Plaintiff was from
Lome; when be went abtoad, Mr. Caulfield
on always in the house, and the witness fre-
taendy saw him and her mistrees sitting on the
,pha together. She did not believe the Plaint-
iff knew or even suspected any thing between
his wife and the Defendant previous to his
flning to the Helder. He was a very fund and in-
dulgent husband. The intimacy with the Defendant
commenced abut half a year before the Plaintiff
went to the Continent, and while he was away, Mrs.
Chambers, who had been in London, came down to
Hartford : Mr. Caulfield soon after followed her,
she, slipped together, and it was a very Lae hour
lettete ire went away. Mrs. C. was in the habit of
g her children in her bed-chamber every morn-
izeo net at chi: time forbade die witness to bring
went in as usual. Her suspicions were first awoke
11, Mrs. C. cc.rrs;rz cut of the bed-chamber one
morning m her dressing gown, and shutting the
0.-er of the passage which was opposite to the wit-
' scfnm, and separated it from the drawing.
Immediately after, she sew de Defendant in
tae dra wing-room wltere be had frequaulyafterwards

Leen teen at an early hour in the morning, without the
witness being able to ascertain how he got in. For
three weeks lie was constantly there at a late hour
at night, and the servants were all sent to bed by
her mistress, thongh all the doors were bolted pre-
viously. She also observed that Mrs. C. about this
time always kept her bed-room door, locked, which
was a thing she had not been accustoined' to do be-
fore. One morning the witness went to her for some
medicine for the children, and her mistress refused
to let her in, and left the medicine in an adjoining
room. From all these ci7cumstances the witness
snspected something not right was on foot, but could
not speak positively
She WAS cross-examined by Mr. BL' Reowk.s ; she
said, there was some disagree:nent between her
master And mistress, about six months before the
former left England ; there was an uneasiness on
bot'i sides, but could not 'tell the cause. She knew
nothing about a loaded pistol, but remembered one
morning, her niistress coming into her bed room,
about one o'clock, when she sat up the most part of
the night, exc-pt now and then resting herself upon
witness's bed: she did not tell her what was thecause
of leav:ng her husband's bed. On Ls tollowin7, day
her mistress went to search for the pistol, and found
two in Mr. Chambers's dressiog-room ; but they
were not loaded. this happened about six months
before the Plaintiff went to the continent ; the next
day Mrs. Chambers -left the house, and never re-
t tried to live there again.
Previous to that time, they had some sculic
abort a letter; but witless could not tell ally thing
of t: a circumstances. When Mr. Chambers joined
his regiment at the }leder, Mrs. C. went down to
the country to see her children, nocomirsnied by her
two sisters, the then Miss R idneys, one of whom
was afterwards marri:d to Mr. Munay, and now
resides in Ireland; the day after ra: Piaintiil's re-
torn the went away with Mts. Mundy, in a post-
chaise.

Question. Were they ever reconciled after ?
Answer. Oh ! No.

She was re-examined by Mr. EItiKINE. She
never saw any uneasiness betw, ea them till after the
ilefenuant repeated his visits. She could not tell
whether th:..se scenes of uneasiness commenced be-
fore or after She saw the alendant sitting pi iv.ttely
or. the supha with her mistress, or what tittle the
pisti i business happened ; the Plaintiff was a fond
and indulgent husband, until he began to stispeet Mr.
C.,ultwd. It was noz. by the Plaintiff 's consult she
left him, as, on his return from the Heisler, he was
two hoot zndeavouring to pet male her to stay with
him and her children.

Bing again examined by Mr. Bo ariowss, she said
the Defendant was in the habit of going backward
and forward, whether the Plaintiff was sit home or
abroad : her mistress used frequently to go out with
him.
Mary Smith was examined by ?dr. GAR Row.
She stated, that she was slime time in the service
of Mrs. Chambers, and when she first lived with her,
was in the year 1802; the then resided at Foraham
St. Martin's, near Bury St. Edmund's. She knew
Captain Caulfield very well ; at that time he passed
fora lodger of her mistress's, and ivied to sleep by
himself, an a room apart from the drawing-ro.im ;
after that, she went to live in Princes-street, Han-
over-square, at Mr. Merlin's, but she did not think
Captain C. was taere. They then went*, Fulham,
where the Captain went in and out occasionally.
Mrs. C. slept in a little closet, off the drawing-
morn, and the Captain in a room opposite ; iron
thence they wont to Muit Farm, near Ryerate,
when the Captain had one bed-chamber, and her
mistress another, which were not far from cacti
• other. Both beds ware slept in every night; bat
she did not know Whether her mistress slcist alone or
not. She was long enough a chamber-maid, to
know whether one or two persons had slept in a bed
she was to make. After her mistress lett Muit
Farm, she went to ROM sea, when ionising pa:ti-
tular happened; and at List her mistress and the
C aptain went to Chertsey, near Weybridge ; there
they lived for some time, and some nights only one
bed was used, and the impression of two heads upon
the bolster in the morning: this was her mistress's
bed ; there was no male an the house at the time,
but the Captain, who was in habits of great familia-
rity with her mistress.
Here the evidence on the part of the 214iatiir was
closed.

Mr. DALLAS, in opening the case on behalf of
the Defendant. admitted that his client was an ele-
gant youag man of fascinating manners. and had
lived much in the gay world ; but he trusted, when
all the facts caste disclosed, the Jury would not find
it a cause for considerable damages. From his
learned friend Mr. Eastint's opening, it appeared
that the Defendant had seduced this lady from her
family, and induced the mother of eight children to
desert her husband and home: he coincided with his
friend. that if this were she case, the Plaintiff was
justly entitled to exemplary damages ; but he ex-
pressed his perfect astonishment at the ternerit} of
the Plaintiff, in bringing himself before the eye oi
the public in this manner. He did not deny tile tact
of the Defendant and the Plaintiff's wife cohabiting
together ; but, from all the circumstaaces, it isi,uid
be for the Jury to consider whether he was c-•••led
to any damages whatever, and this must depend on
the answer he should give to the charge as proved.
If the Jury were to believe the evidence of Mrs.
Liddle, the Plaintiff had uniformly acted the part of
an amidst, husband; but if he were instructed right,
be would shew that his condact had been most
harsh, brutal, and barbarous. In this CAW Cap-
tairt,lC. was not the only person nn his trial, use
Plamtiff's character was also in question. He then
expressed his surprise, that the sister to the Plaintiff,
who was the first examined. should be al-
lowed to retire without a single question
asked her relative to the Plaintiff's general con-
dud towards his wife; it was a little extraor-
dinary that the son of Sir IVilliam Chambers,
after cohabiting for sixteen years with his wife, could
not produce one respectable witness t s speak to this
point; to such persons as be then addiessed, who
were all husbands, fathers, and men of the world,
this must be evident. 'lle question, therefore. was.
whether Captain Caulfield had alien tted the of
of this lady from her husband ? and this he
would put beyond a possibility of dolbt, from the
evidence of the Plaintiff himself. waich appeared
self convieted in a series of letters which be
irniluc-d in the Plaintiff's own hand-writing.—
He then adverted to those letters wiitten to Mrs.

C. during her separation from the Plaintiff; in the
first of Which, dttedin May I 7”8, he said, lam
really au shocked, and ashamed at my own eondua,
that I ttaanot come home ; aEt as you like in every
respcf, and be assured it will meet with my appro-
bation ; fix your income at what you pleas 4 and 1
will en leavour to pay it, &c. The rent letter
adverted to, begins---.. My dearest Jane, what
sensations has you: lovely letter caused in me? if
you only try me once more, be assured you shall
not r- ceive any personal violence ; if you knew
how I love you, you could not refuse me. I will
place implicit confidence in you, I know I have
been wrong ; pray come back, and I will be
a pattern of goodness, you are absolutely ne-
cessary to me ; pray come, and, I assure you,
I will not use you again with personal vio-
lence." The next letter expresses his regret at her
persisting in not returning to him, and again pro-
mising that he never will injure her person. Mr.
!)alias then observed. that notwithstanding all
this barbarous treatment, and all this correspond-
ence, this pattern of a woman—he would say, this
perfeft angel of a woman—did, in the benignity of
her own mind, consent to return to him upon cer-
tain conditions. At that time Lord Rodney was
alive, and she had sought proteCtion under her bro-
ther's roof, who was then Captain Rodney, and now
upon duty in the East Indies. A deed was then en-
tered into, which t ricked, that differences had arisen
between them, and, in order to induce her to return
again to him, he stipulated, in a manner mast dis-
graceful tie himself, that he would treat her with all
due kindness and regard, and, in case of future dif-
ferences, she should be at liberty to leave him. He
then cited some other letters,which were written after
his return from the fielder, all of which were in terms
of supplication for pardon, and entreaties for her
return ; assuring her that he should become an al-
tered eliaracter, and declaring, as to the business of
the pistol, he had no intention of using it. This, the
Learned Counsel observed, was not the language of
a gallant soldier going to or returning from a fo-
reign expeditii in against the enemies ot his country,
that though he made use of the pistols, he did not
mean to lodge their contents in her heart. Was
this the gentleman, he asked, who corn &tined of
his wife's affections being alienated from him, and
sought to obtain reparation in damages from an
English Jury, who had given the most unequivocal
evidence of his own barbarity ? Fur the sake of
justice, for the sake of the public, he concluded, he
trusted that a person of this description world not '
even receive one shilling damages from a i3ritish
Jury.
Mr. Boodle/then proved the execution of the deed
of separation, or rather reconciliation, and the hand-
writing of all the letters.
The deed and letters were then read.
Mr. Eusetna, in a most feeling, impressive, and
eloquent address, spoke at great length upon the
evidence on both sides ; he declared, that so in my
reports had been industriously circulated, so many
stories spread upon this business, for the purpose of
deterring the Plaintiff from appearing before the
Court and Jury upon this occasion, that it had
almost an effect upon himself, and he thought he
had got a client of a most extraordinary stamp in-
deed ; he Was in so much astonishment, he did not
well know how to express hinuelt, and, he trusted in
God, the Jury would not feel the sentiments which
his friend on the other side wished to impress upon
them. He then said, he would take his text from
Mr. Dassris's opening, who admitted, that if the
Jury should think the Defendant was the cause
of this separation, of this sedaCtion, of tearing
a mo't beautiful and accomplished woman from
the arms of an aikftionate and fond husband,
from her lovely children, and from her home, they
would give him exemplary damages. lie then,
with his usual unrivalled ability, adverted to the
whple of the evidence, and largely expatiated upon
the conduct of the DefeMdant m pursuing the adul-
te: out course, who, when the time of trial comes,
ransacks all the family secrets, all the private corre-
spondence between man and wile, in order to make a
foundation firr an infamonsdefence. The Plaintiff and
his wite,intheprime oft!. ei r youth,fiew intoeach others
arms with mutual uffeaion, and were married clan-
destinely ; that marriage afterwards sanSioned by ,
their parents, and in the presence of their God ; the
offspring of that union, eight most lovely children,
and fourteen years spent in the utmost harmony and
affection, until the adulterer stepped in, who blasted
all their joys, and destroyed all their happiness ; who
had cast a blot upon these children, the descend-
ants of a nobly and gallant Lotd, and marked his
escutcheon with an indelible stain.. Any Sparring*
and disputes which arose bet-seen them, were, he
observed, to be imputed to jealousy, which was the
bitter root of all these grievances ; and, though
that jealousy called forth some ills of violence at
times, yet lose was still at the bottom. It the
Plaintiff had been attached to any other woman,
or had rioted in debauchery, it might be some
palliation on the part of the Defendant ; but
there was not one tittle of evidence to shew this.
The language of the Plaintiff sheeted him to be a
man distraftedly fond of his wife, and the pistol busi-
ness was the only aft of violence in proof; and this
might have had some other objed in view, which,
although he did not give it utterance, yet—" Grief
whispered to the tortured heart, and bade it burst!"
He concluded, by involiag the jury, as Britons, to
rec tlleCt they were haskialids and fathers, to give that
compensation to his client which was the only one
he could now receive.

Lord Eci.caaoaouca, in snmming up the evi-
dence, adverted to the very brilliant display of
talent which had appeared on both sides ; but ad-
vised the Jury to consider the matter coolly and de-
liberately. He observed that the letters were preg-
nant with expressions of the personal injury and
hitshness which had taken place on the part of the
Plaintiff before the introduction of Captain Caul-
field, and no suggestion whatever in the letters of
any misconduct, or any foundation even to impute
levity to her, which, although highly reprehensible
in him. was no reason at all that the Defendant should
have acted the part he had done; and if the Jury
found that his interference had at all deprived the
Plaintiff of the comfort of her society, they were
bound to give such damages as they should con2ider
him entitled tn.

The Jury re:ired for a short time. and then folnd
a veraict for the Plaint.h :n Tmo 1 ituusAso
Por:c DS damages.

Prommg...ww-
MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.

g

Mary Baker, ElizsGet4 d.o e. Frowes Demi, Stowe-
nal: Ciaree, and a Otge G•114)481.11/, were indiete i at
the suit of George Cracklow, for raising a Tigi! •tild
mob about his hoese in St.„catherine'sdatre. It if,.
peered from the evidence of the Prosecutor, and two
other witnesses, that the Traverse-rs had assembled
a mob round Mr. Craclrdow's doer, with frying.
pans, kettles, tin saucepans, keys, and various other
kinds of music of the Lame sort, pLnyilig up the
Rogues' March, and Cracklow and his wife
by various opprobrious names, and that the
Defendant Mary Baker had dressed out a doll, 4
purporting to be the effigy of Mrs. Crack-
low, and having given it to the mob, at the tid,ll ;
time distributing h ilfpence, desired them to burn
the b—, Mrs. Cracklosv, or to blow up the 4
old accordingly, the effigy was hung up
against the window of the Prosecutor's house, wills
the maiden name, and also the pre.-nt name of his
wife written over it, and that gunpowd..r being set
under it, it was blown up, the while ma), shoutipg ;
out, thcre got-. the 01.1 b M. era.: 1.. u".; at
the same time play:is op the rough *rex as a was
termed.
On the part of the Defendants, Mrs. Prose'r le-
posed, that Mrs. Crackiow and her sister liad, ut
the morning of the day in which the riot
knocked several times a: the door of Ars. Baker,
calling her different vile names ; that zhe had paid .
a drummer of a volunteer association in that neigh-
bourho sd, to play up the Raves' h before her
dons, and that she hal stuck a cock oat of her win.
dow, saying, that that was a sign she was cock .f .11
the walk.
Mr. MAINWARINC dejectod the Defendants into
the hands the Jury, who pronouuced them all
They were then sentenced by the Owens-Mar,
Baker, to pay a due of lUi.1 Elizabeth Biker, di I
Frances Demo, 31. ; Susannah Clark, and G;torge
Galloway, 40s. each.
J,:!ra it ,it was indiaed, at the suit of di._ pa. • ii',
for keeping a house of ill. hme, and, b" „Laplacr.
count, for keeping a disorderly house, iis sten
street ; it was proved by several respenahle *keenest
that . house was inhabited by many vivmt,.l of
very loose manners, who were con zanily iasentit*
every man who passed to go in, and it tt e ; i
fendant had often gone into the house to collect
rent. The Lolle,:lors of the different taxes pioyesiv t
that Mr. Brit always pail Clem the :axes due on the
house, though he did not live in it.
Mrs. Higgins, one of the ladies who lived in the house, swore, that she had always paid her reut,to I
either Mr. or Mrs. Brit ; ;hat the house was furnish-
ed by the Defendant ; that she paid him fourteen
guineas a-month for it, he paying taxes ; that be well
knew in what manner she was to earn t:ie money to
pay him his tent.
Mr. k stay spoke at length for tl.: Defendant,
but called no witnesses.
Jury found him—tin/04
Ha was accordin:.tly sentenced to six months'
int-
prisoemenr, to pay 5.4. ti.te, and to find sureties lir
two years, himself in ek/01. aad two sureties iat.loOl.
each.
•

1 TOM.G•ttb4ll6
On Saturday, a man was brought up on a ehaige '
of getting goods under false pretences. It 110:e3o-d
that he had escaped from a prison in 1-lanitto.fh,
and that, having arrived here, he ee.scrlied
as an H.imhuign merchant, that he wanted s iarge
quantity of goods for exportation, and a.:ltsally
ob-
tained them to the amount of r.rne 11 WI 13 edi. 1
Some t t the goods had been storped at Gravesend.
He had the address, when he wanted cash, to go in -
a violent hurry into one of the hoes. s where he had
ordered go ids, and requested the Lian of 501. or -
!OA fora few ho Ist. His defence not being con.
sidered satisiadory, he was comnatted for trial.

DUBLIN.

IC INC.'.s BENCH, NOV. 49.
The K rya, at the Preuretion of Sir 1.110314 S JUDKIS
FITZ GERALD, Bert. r. RO !ER I POl ILI'.
Mr. Justice Liar, After a very el Tient add: ess.
in the course of wnich he remarke,i, that whatever
i ijury Mr. Potter had sustained in paint of tha—
railer, by the aspersions thrown on his loyalty by
Sir Thmnas, in the year 1793, w.ts entirely done
away, and that charatier and that loyalty complete*
vinaicatPd by the verdict which he obtained in the

year 1799 ; and, that therefore, in the
which he had off-red to sir Thomas

•
for which, to that hour, he had attempted neither
apology nor atonement, he was aCtuated fav she
most rancorous spirit of revenge; pr:...tee,ted to
pronounce the sentence of the court, which w 4,,
that Mr. Potter should be confined three mouths in
Newgate. and be fined one mark, and that, at disci.
piration of his imprisonment, he should enter asas a
recognisance, himself in 10001. and two sureties ix
5001. each, to keep the peace for seven years. Ni.
cholas Connolly Hussey, Esq. an cohere in the army,
who w.ss conyicied of a similar cadence at the last
assizes of Tfalee, at the prosecution of Dr. Moriarty,
was, at the same time, s-ntenced to siz months ins-
prisonment, and to pay a fine to the King or'
The Postern Gate at the Castle is now (pen. and
the bartiers removed, so as to restore the usual com-
munication between Ship-street and Palace-street,
through the Lower Castle-yard.

Extr.di of a Letter harts Mr. WrssiaNt Hay.
DON, an (kfiCer Of His MatJUTv's ship Ramsey, to
his brother :
" His Maj•nty's *sip Eagle, off th 2
" Di Ael /loonies, Texel. line. 24.
"On Su .day la at we left Yarmouth to join Admiral It es. •
set. Wm 's? morning we ran on shore the South
off the New Deep, neu the Teitel. We lay without aan:.
Lice; and, on Tuesday, as them was nu dwibt the ilt.p
must be totally lon, we made atneral raft. of the mud. 1
dinusail bainas, 2c. and at eleven o'cl.ck p. 1 left
the ship un one of then,, ancons;..aniod by twelve 11l our
men. At sunset 1 saw a Dutch cutter taking the ow*. from
the raft.; but it corning dark, we were driven out le lea, and
lost light of them ; but, thank God, about tea at nig* we hal
the good fortune to fail m with the Alert cutter, who MIA au
ud, nr we mutt hay • peruhed, as it blew fresh, alai Ike as nut
very h•ah. The gre.tcst part of out crew art in Holland.
Tae trust: upset almost unmed..tely after ta., Weft hurnet
nut, •r .1 men were lost. I sin at roam so weak that
I cm.. t give yea a ram fuel account of the oepeseibie germ
ISt wets su.'