The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1822-12-19 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, OvuxuALL,
n ICDNILIDAY, DrCtlil•Ell 18.

London Adjourned Sittings, fore the Lots Cnicr iVSTICIC
and a Special Jury.

CRIM. CON.-BARKER v. POTTS.

Mr: Cirtrrer opened the pleadings. The damages were laid
at Ten Thousand Pounds.

Mr. Serjeant Laws staled the case to the Jury. In lay-
ing before the Jury the eiraumstances of the ease upon
whteb they welt to form their judgment, be shoUld
abstain from the introduction of every topic which did
not strictly belong to it. Cases of this kind adotittcd of.
'eery Mkt), according to the nature of the injury
sustained; but in no ease, where the husband was not
the author of his own dishonour, afield it be otherwise felt
Shan that be bad received a serious and a cruel isijury.. The,
Plaintiff in this cue wasa Captnin In the line, and afterwards
in the Nottingham militia. In Me he married a very young
lady, Miss Penelope Amelia Byrne. The Defendant was a
Lieutenant in the militia. Fora me time after the marriage,
the parties lived in the utmost cordiality. They were first mar-
vied in Scotland; and, as was customary in such eases, they
were married, on their return, in Yorkshire. This lady was
possessed of a very considerable fortune ; and alter they had
been married for some time, some unhappy difference arose
about the appointment of trustees, which finally led ton sepa-
ration. A deed of separation was then signed, by which their
fixture mode of living was regulated. But although the inter-
course was for a while suspended, strong hopes were enter-
tained of a reconciliation, and would probably have been ac-
oomplished but for the interposition of the Defendapt, whose
conduct for ever rendered that impossible, and bleated all
their expectations. This deed of separation did not put an
end to the right °faction, although it altered, in some degree,
the features 01 the case; but to what extent, would be for the
Jury to determine. There was no earthly reason for suppos-
ing that the parties would not have been united ; fur indeed it
would be proved, that so strong was the affectiou subsisting
between them, that every probability existed of so happy a
result, had not this Defendant rushed in, acid basely snatched
away the last remnant of hope. It would therefore be for the
Jury to estimate the amunt of dimities. Money had been
,made-lhe standard to regulate these matters, but no sum of
'money could compaiskte for the.wound received. However,
it was the only reparation Udine it was in the power of a
Jury to grant.
Mrs. Frances Barker sworn—l am the mother of Mr.
Samuel Barker, the Plaintiff in this action. I was present at
his marriage in Yorkshire: it took place on the slat August,
1516. The lady was nut ta_years of age. She was poste-awed
tif a very latge property. air. Barker was about 30 years of
age. lie was at the time in the Nottingham militia, where
some of his connexions resided. He held the rank of Cap-
tain. Alter the marriage they resided with me about eight or
nine months, and they lived very happily together—they were
mutually kind to each other. They then went to reside at
Clifton, and I never saw her after.—CA letter was put into
the hands of the witness, which she proved to be the hand-
writing of her daughter-in-taw.]
Cros.s.examiued by Mr fierjeant VAvollan—l sar- the lady
before her marriage. The name given at her marriage was
Penelope Amelia Barker, and ant Byrne. They. were living
at that time as man and wife. I knew the Pliuutiff bad run
away with her. It was a match without the consent of her
parents. Mr. Barker is now about as years of age.—CA letter
was then handed to the witness, which she proved to be her
son's hand-writing. —I am afraid her fortune was the cause ofl
their difference. There was a farming man, of the name of
Ward, present, who answered as father. I was at the house
of Mr. Wool cy the clergyman, who is my sun-in-law. My
dustier-in-law was on a visit at Mr. Woolley's, and it was
thought advisable they should be married at tbo church where
he officiated. Mr. Woolley is brother to Adairal Woolley,
and was Rector of Hutton Bushel, in Yorkshire.
Henry Heyman ass orn-1 sin a gardenerm i
,- 1 reside at Telco-
math, in Devonshire. I know Mrs. Barker ; she was living
at Bell-hill cottage, at Teignmouth, in IMO. Her husband'
was not then living with her. I knew the Defendant, he
lived at that time at Temouth. I was gardener to Mrs.
Barker. About the time Drat saw them together, was when
she took the house. She brodght with her two maids and on.
lad. I did not sleep io the house. I have frequently son
Mrs. Barker and Mr. Polls walkingtogether. Tbereappouted
an intimate asquinatanoe between them. He appeared lobe
ber ebief acquaintance. Mr. Potts lived with his motherpsdl
sister at Teignmout h. I afterwards saw them in the parlour
together, in which they usually sat, very near each other, his
arm resting on her lap. I never saw any thing more particu-
lar. She left Teignmanth on the tath of January, teal. On
the night she tell it, Mr. Potts came to the house. I had
some doubts Mrs. Barker was going to leave, and I staid up
to watch. I saw the dash of a candle in our of rooms, and
shortly afterwards Mr. Potts and Mrs. Barker came out, got
into a carriage which was waiting at the turnpike-road, and
drove away.
Cross-examined by Mr. &dent Paaaa—Mrs. Barker's
mother lived in the house. The mother of Mr. Potts was in
the habit of visiting at the house. Mr. Potts had been absent
for some time, but returned a mouth at least before the elope-
ment. .
John Barker,gsq. sivarn=4i'm a gentleman of the profes-
sion of tbe bor. My brother, the Plaintiff, was married in
tell- He and his wife lived with my mother. I then lived in
Loncloo. 1 did not see them until the summer after, and
they lived very happily together. My impreasion was, that
no man could treat his a ife more properly than my brother.
About three weeks or a month previous to their separation, I
saw them in Lundon,and they then lived in a most affectionate
u% They were then in London for three weeks, and I I
saw them every day.
Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Yarewan—aly brother
went into Nottinghamshire andLineolusbire to see his estates,
and after his return they separated. Mrs. Barker had come I
of age a few weeks previously., at that time a separation had
not been spoken of • the first knowledge he bad of an inten-
tion to separate was from a letter from the lady to her bus.
Mud while he was in Nottinghamshire; my brother went to
live at Clifton after the separation, and his wife went to De-
vonshire ; I have heard my brother say be had received one
or two half-yearly payments of 3001. a year from Mrs. Barker,
and I bays beard him say be had slept with his wife since his
separation. It was at Bath they slept together, and 1 think
it was there he received the money.
Mr. derjeant Yausneam—Do you know whether he gave a
receipt fur the money ?—(a laugh.)
I learned from him that sbe expressed a desire to return to
live with him on certain conditions, namely, to have the en-
tire control over the property bequeathed to ber by leer
father, and the entire appointment of trustees, and one of
those alsoeW be, Mr. Watson, ber own illegitimate brother,
in place of a newt respectable gentleinan (Mr. Hall), uue of
the guardians under the will my brother would not consent
to these conditions. Mrs. Barker sent her husband s ring
with bar leak ; my brother is aware that the property was set-
tled on her for her separate use ; my brother has stipulated
and is to receive the sum of stool. on a presentation to a liv •
ing, provided the present incumbent should die during the
lifetime of Mrs. Barker. These conditions were proposed
boilibefore and after the se ration.
Samuel Hickey sworn—l keep the King's Arms at Hemp.
ton Court. Oa Sunday,the lath Feb. sail, I recollect a lady
and gentleman arriving in a isest-chaise; 1 did nut attend
upon them • they staid until Thursday morning, when they
walked ouelogether ; the lady and two gentlemen came back,
and afterwards she wetit away In the chaise with oue of the
gentlemen.
Sarah Rossim sworn—l lived at Ilamptoo Court at the
King's Arms in February, 1811 I was chambermaid ; a lady
and gentleman came there and remained four or hive days ;
they slept in the same bed ; I bad occasion to go to the dour
in the mornings with some warm water; the gentleman took
the water; the bed had the appearance of two persons having
slept in it.
James Wright, sworn A—l remember a lady and gentleman
having come to the KITSAram In February. I atteoded un
them as waiter. The we've away un Thursday moraine,
and afterwards return with two gentlemen. Mr. Potts
went and knocked at Mrs. Barker's door, and gave her her
keys. The lady and gentleman went away, and Mr. Putts
went away in about ten minutes alter.
Mr. !gumtree, sworn.—At the request of her uncle I went
in search of Mrs. Barker. While I was sitting in the inn at
Kingston I saw Mr. Potts in the street. I did sirst know him
before. I went up and spoke to him ; he said Mrs. Barker
was in a shop, he would call her out, and lie would then go
to the homiest • military friend at Kingston. Accordingly
be did nor and then I followed them to the garden of Mr.
Potts's friend. Adis, a considerable discussion 1 revailed
oa Mrs. Barker to comet to return to town with me. I
then sent for a postehaisea.mt Went with her to alainploh
Court; while there Mrs. iseras keys were put iutu the'
room be Mr. Potts, and I then busreisOn her to town, and left
her at-the house of her relation, in Norfolk-street, iu the
Strand.
Cross-examined by Mr.Serjeant I'lmm—A how-street offi-
cer end two friends of mine were at Kingston. •
This was the case tor the Plaintiff.
Mr. Serjeaat VALanAll addressed the Jury fur rho Defeo&
ant. Hp said the advocate standing in his situation had •
very panful duty to perform. lu the *bole course of bis ex-
perience lie never met a case like the present, and if there
were any disguise about it it was fitting it Afield be cleared
up; and much as he feared the powerful reply of his Learned
Friend, still be should give him any opportunity or replying,
rather than that the Jury should take our step in the dark.
It was gratify lug to him that he bad not to defend a MSS is
which there had been a single circumstance of aggravatios.
His client could not be accused of having violated the tie+ of
• hospitality ; ho could not be accused of having deprived the
husband of the society of his wife ; but be would tell them, in
the words of the thelaratioo, of what the husband had been
deprived—it was the use and benedt of a aunt of money,
amounting to i,boel. a year, settled upon his wile. This was
the grummets of the charge, and this was the loss *filch this
husband bad sustained, having sold thu society of his wife for
a stipulated Mom of soot. a year. The money, in fact, was
the sting of the ease; and when his client was branded as a se-
der, be would boldly say the husband was the first seducer.
It would seem that the father of this young latly. bad looked
with a pirophrtie spirit to the future destiny of his child, and
bad pealed his fortune upon bet On her own an and weent,