The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-02-13 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, SATURDAY, FEB. li.

DON JOIE ANTONIO D.YRISARRI V. W. J. CLEMENT, ESQ.
In this ease a rule had been obtained, calling on the plaintiff to
show cause why the verdict should not be set aside and a nonsuit
entered, or a new trial granted, on the ground, first, that Chili was
not a State ; and secondly, that the plaintiff could not recover on
this libel, as he was engaged in illegally attempting to raise a loan
tot a foreign country.
The COURT now overruled both these objections, but mentioned
a third, namely, that the meaning of the libel was not properly
stated in the innuendos inserted in the decimation ; and on this
ground they thought the case ought to go down to a new trial.
The rule for a new trial was accordingly made absolute.

CONSISTORY COURT,
SATURDAY, FEB. 11.

THE MOST NOBLE THE MARCHIONESS 0 WESTMEATH V.

TILE MARIIIIIS OF WESTM)ATH.
The arguments in this case were resumed on the sitting of the
Court. Dr. Phillimore, on the part of the Marquis of Westmeath,
followed Dr. Jenner, whose arguments at the same side had occu.
pied the Court during the last sitting.
Dr. PIIILLIMont entered at great length into the details of the
evidence. He adverted particularly to those charges of cruelty and
adultery against the Marquis which had not been relied upon by
the Marchioness's Counsel, because they were aware that the testi-
mony upon which those charges were founded was corrupt, and
could not be depended upon in a Court of Justice. The same wit.
nesses, however, who had supported the charges which had been
abandoned bemuse they were confessedly unfounded, were relied
on to support those charges of cruelty upon which the Marchioness
of Westmeath now came forward to demand a divorce. But could
any weight be given to testimony which, when it was applied to other
charges, had been demonstrated to be false? The whole mass of evi.
dente adduced to support the charge of cruelty against the Marquis
was of no mixed a character that he contended no Court
ought to be influenced by it. The witness Sarah 111•Kermic, upon
whose testimony so much depended, was clearly Identified with the
persons who had been found guilty of perjury. They were proved
to have been under her immediate care and surveillance, and he
contended that this fact was sufficient to throw a rational suspicion
upon the testimony of that witness. In short, the case abounded
with fraud, perjury, and conspiracy. Many of the witnesses were
sunk knee-deep in perjury, and it was impossible, under such cir-
cumstances, not to scrutinise the evidence which remained with
great severity and caution. Charges upheld by such testimony
should be examined with the most critical accuracy. One charge
had been imported into the case, which, he must say, he did not
think his beamed Friend (Dr. Lushington) was justified in com.
menting W
upon in the manner in which he had done. Lord est.
meath, it seemed, had taken his daughter, a child of seven years
old, under his own care, and this was held to he a monstrous act of
cruelty. Ills Learned Friend said he was sorry to find that persons
of high rank were base enough to countenance such conduct. Now
this was stepping out of his way, stepping out of Court, and bring-'
ing the Duke and Duchess of Buckingham to the bar of the Court,
merely because Lady Rosa, the Marquis of Westmeath's daughter,
had been removed to Avington, the Duke of Buckingham's seat,
when her father thought proper, as lie was fully warranted in doing,
to take his infant child under his own management. This really
seemed an insufficient reason for attacking the character of the Duke
and Duchess of Buckingham, and he certainly thought his Learned
Friend should explain the expressions which fell him from on this
subject. There was no question of law arising out of this case. Lord
Westmeath appeared for the purpose of enforcing cohabitation with
his wife, and there was no vestige of that description of cruelty in
the case which could justify the Court in coming to any other de-
cision than that prayed for by Lord Westmeath. The rank of the
parties had been pressed upon the Court ; but he was confident that
no Immunities or indulgence would be granted to the parties in this
case which would not also be granted to parties in the middle class
of life, it' they came before the Court under similar circumstances. I
The Marchioness of IVestmeath, like every other married woman,
had solemnly bound herself to live with her husband until death did
them part, and unless she showed good grounds for breaking that
contract, unless she showed that there was actual clanger of life or
limb, the Court was bound to enforce the contract. It would never
set FO bad a precedent as that because a woman was of high rank
she may quartet wi:h her husband, and remove herself from
those restraints which every other married woman was under.
Be trusted the case with confidence to the Court. lie
felt that the noble for whom he appea needed only to
have his CM hatrp hi: mci
40 have the caluMmous aspersions, which
were neemetwelts upon him is the pmgresa of that suit, com-
pletely simmered; •Ile Marquis of Westmeath's conduct was dic.
toted by *verb= feelings toward, his wife. There was evi-
deutly a OD preettation towards her, which clearly '