The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-04-02 00:00:00

ANTRIM ASSIZES, Miacn 26.


SEDUCTION.
TIOMAI lIVNTEN. Or ILILLIAD, PLISINTITT ;
JAMES NrCOIID, Or SAYE PIACI:, DEFENDANT.
Thie was an action brought by the plaintiff to recover from the
defendant damages for loss of the plaintiff's daughter's services, in
consequence of her seduction by defendant. The damages were
laid at SOW.
Mr. HOLMES addressed the Jury for the plaintiff at ronsider-
able length, and stated in very energetic and pathetic language,
that the defendant had gained the affections of plaintiff's daughter,
and under the mask of honourable attention, had robbed her of
her virtue, in consequence of which she became enceinte, and was
delivered Ma female child in May last. In a fortnight afterwards
she died of a broken heart. The Counsel, after describing the
various circumstances of the case with much eloquence, produced
the following evident,: in support of his statement.
Margaret Macartney, the first witness, examined—Knows plain-
tiff; he was the father of right children ; knew his daughter Mary
Ann front childhood ; her mother is alive: she was the only
daughter; witness lives in the neighbourhood, and was intimate in
the family ; knew the defendant, but could not say there was any
particular intimacy between them, until matters turned out as they
did ; saw tlern together at parties ; it was suspected that they
were going to be married one morning, and witness and her hus-
band were sent for; nothing particular happened while witness was
present; Mr. Orr and witness's husband were present ; thinks
plaintiff's daughter was 21 when she died ; sees defendant in Court
and identifies him.
Win. John Dillon, attorney—Lives in Antrim in vacation ;
knows plaintiff and his family, and has been on terms of intimacy
with him ' • knew the deceased, and believes she was about 20 when
she died; she might be mote; heard she had been educiated at •
boarding-school in Belfast: knows defendant, and cons ders him
very independent; heard reports of his ,paying attention to plain.
tiff's daughter.
Rev. Robert Orr—Knows plaintiff thirty years; he was a hearer
of witness's, and defendant has lately become so. Was sent for
by Mrs. Hunter upon an occasion alluded to by a former witness,
but Mr. M'Cord did not stern ready for marriage until he would
consult two particular friends. The plaintiff was anxious the mar-
riage should be celebrated that day, but defendant put it off. It
NM nearly four years ago.
John M'Coy—Knows defendant • had a conversation with him,
the substance of which was, that he would marry Miss Hunter if
her father would agree to give him over the property, if he (defend-
ant) would pay the mortgage debts on it, and that there was not •
more proper girl than Miss Hunter in the country, in her situation.
There was a mortgage of 600 f. against plaintiff's property.
Henry Christie—Knew the daughter of plaintiff, Mary Ann
Hunter. Knew her when she was with child. Was coming from
Handalstowa fair with defendant, when defendant said to witness,
it was • terrible thing had befallen Mary Ann Hunter, but lie
would do for the child, as he believed it to be his. This was after
Mary Ann Hunter's death.
Cross-examined--Never had any quarrel with defendant, but
bought a piece of land from him and a John M'llvenna, and gave
him a bond, which witness's brothers afterwards paid, and got rid
of him. Never said he would be revenged on Mr. M`Cord.
Mary Montgomery—Knows plaintiff and knew his daughter a
long time before her death. Was on a visit at her father's more
than a year ago. Knows defendant, and knew of his coming there
at night. Saw him there at night at the window of her room, and
knew of his being admitted through the window once ; heard him
at the window more than once.
Sarah Mulholland—Knew the late Mary Ann Hunter ; she has
a child, which witness took care of for fire nights and six days ;
knows defendant ; met him one day, and he asked if Mi.g Hunter
was getting better, and if it was true that they were good to her ;
the lay in in her father's house ; witness slid they were very good
to her, and she was getting better ; he said be would be sorry to see
her in wan•, or the child either, as so long as he had a penny she
should haves halfpenny of it, and hoped she would soon be his
own ; this wasabout seven days after she lay in, and she died in
about a fortnien.
James M` Donnell, surgeon, attended Mary Ann Hunter from
the 28th May, when site lay in, till the 10th -June, when she died ;
she was properly attended, but died of puerperal fever ; her father
paid witness for medicine and attendance.
Elisabeth Hughes nursed the deceased ; knew her living at her
father's house, spinning, sewing, and knitting, and doing other
things ; she was a very fine, nice young woman.
Francis M`Anullis—Lived with the plaintiff; knows where
plaintiff lived in the country, and often saw defendant at the back
of the house, in the garden, at Miss Hunter's windows, between
ten and eleven o'clock; he saw defendant once on his knees at the
window, and laid hold of him, and attendant said he was waiting
for a letter to give to his brother ; saw hint there after that, and saw
him go in by the window.
Mr. Bcac LIR, in an able address to the Jury for the defendant,
dwelt with much force upon the apparent incredibility of the wit-
neva Christie, who was the only one that attempted to prove ad ac-
knowledgment of seduction by the defendant.
The Jury returned with a verdict fog the plaintlff-3001. damage.,
and Id. costs.
*

-Atri . V4l 1.41 POLICE.

GUILDHALL.
Fredrrick Drlmo* and Joseph Mould, the two young men ap-
prehended for the offence of extorting money from Mr. Thomas
Cozens, chemist, Castle-street, Leicester-square, under the throes
of charging him with indecent and unnatural propensities, were
brought up for final examination, before 111 r. Alderman Ar arKS.
Since their HIV. hearing, Mr. Harmer had been indefatigable in
tracing out a previous connection between Denman and the lad
Mould, and endeavouring to procure evidence as to the hand-wrias
in of the former, in both of which he had been successful.
From the evidence he now produced it appeared that the pet.
sonars had never succeeded in ascertaining Mr. Coterie residence,
though they had by some means found out correctly his Christina
and surname, and. 111ould having on one occasion watched Mi.
Cozens into a hackney-coach in Fleet-street, and followed It all the
way to Mr. Griffiths's, Pollen's-row. Islington, where Mr. Cosecs
went in, after waiting some rime without teeing hint return, knocked
at the door and inquired for him, saying, that the gentleman had
given him some money • day or two before, a part of which was
bad, and he wanted him to change it ; and being told he was gone, ,
threateted to get an officer and search the house.
On the Thursday afterwards both the prisoners called at 111 r.
Griffiths's, declared that they knew Mr. Cozens lodeed there, and
insisted upon seeing him. The man-servant looked at them well,
so as to be able to recognise them again.
To prove the hand-writing of Denman two witnesses were called.
A respectable venerable-looking gentleman, Dr. Nisbet, of the
Cottage ketreat, Doris.strett. Lambeth, stated that he knew the
prizoner Denman, by the came of Frederick Henry Annersley, and
that he had had him as his amanuensis for some months. (A letter
was shown hint, which he (Dr. N.) had received from Frederick
the previous day, in which he informed hint that he had forfeited
his life to the offended laws of his country, expressed in the strong.
eat terms his gratitude to the Doctor for the many kindnesses he
had received thorn him and his worthy family, and imploring him to
call upon bin at the Giimpur.street Compter, and inquire for him
in the name of Denman.) This letter tire Doctor knew to be the
ptisoner's hand.writing ; but upon being shown the letter sent to
Mr. Cozens, he said It was something different front Frederick's
general hand ;it wan like it—he thought it might be his, but he
could not, in his conscience, swear positively that it was his hand-
writing. .

Denman, at the former examination, and up to this moment,
had conducted himself with an air of confidence, and even of pert.
ness, but the appearance of his venerable patron, and the unaf-
fected feelingof reluctance with which he gave evidence against
him, entirely overcame him. lle became greedy agitated, burst
into a violent flood of tears, was no longer able to support himself
at the bar, and during the remainder of the examination was in-
dulged with a chair.
The lad Mould, however, maintained throughout his composure,
and viewed his companion in guilt rather with a look of contempt
than pity.
The depositions were then read over with great care to all the
witnesses, and the prisoners asked by the Magistrate if they wished
to put any question to either of them : but they both uniformly
declined to put any, and they were both committed to Newgate for
trial, Mould for tit° separate offences, viz.—for highway rubbery,
in the county of Middlesex; and secondly, conjointly with Den-
men, for the felony, in sending a threatening letter to obtain money
under the late statute, 4th Geo. IV. cap. 64.
By this mode of indictment the life of Denman will be spared,
the punishment for his offence under the statute extending only to
transportation for life.
QUEEN-SQUARE.
MISOON DUCT OF WATCH 311E31.--OM Thursday Pateiek
Hewett, a watchman belonging to St. George's, Hanover.square,
appeared on a summons before Messrs. GRLOORIE and WA 'TIC,
the Magistrates, to answer the complaint .1 J ohn -Colman, a die.
mount night patrol, for an assault, and obstructing him In the
execution of his duty.
The complainant stated, that he, with another patrol, were sta-
tioned round Grosvenor place and its avennee. Their instructions
are. to be very particular in inspecting the areas and gates of the
railings; that in the exercise of his duty the orisoner rtpeatedly in.
suited them, although he (witness) said who they were, and re.
monstrated with him for his improper conduct. The prisoner,
however, said he knew them well ; shin used several insulting ex-
pressions, and shoved him into t'e middle of the footpath.
ness, in consequence, was induced to acquaint his superiors of the
prisoner's conduct.
Warren, the other patrol, fully confirmed his partner's testi-
mony.
!Jewett, in his defence, said he had been a watchman for MX
months past ; he had never made a chargers. inst any one during
that time, nor had ever been before a Magistrate.
31r. WAITE told him his conduct was disgraceful. That busi-
ness had he to he locked up in the box intoxicated ? If that was his
usual practice there was no chance of his ever bringing a proper
charge before them. He was not a fit person for a watchman, and
he was ordered to be dismissed.

Rokrt Pr:flows, a watchman of St. Alartio'a in the Fields, was
charged with bong of his brat, drunk and disorderly.
Patterson attempted a paltry excuse in vindication of himself,
but the fumes ot liquor not having evaporated,
The Magistrate abruptly ordered him to be expelled, and a no.
tice sent to the Board of Green Cloth for his dismissal.