The National Register.
London, England, 1818-08-10 00:00:00

tt:,
thr
co;
Jer

AUG. 10

NORTHUNIGERLAND.—Acc. 4.
citum. V. cLiatus.

chip, in *awning slit, lamented teat he -could not find any
,Irrutnd of doubt to the evidence, and onzgested to the jury,
u; the only milts left to them, to trenowit.od him to no•t.ev.
Theiury Pound st vcidict of guilty, but leen,uusend,-d him to
mercy in Consideration of his youtii and fonnercti,ii 1113,
noel..
Mr. Johu Lonlvert nko Artnnlty reco•woootivil him iti Merry.
The p unhappy father eat 'to Court during the trial.
CIVIL .811n.',.
nnown

TIIP plaintiff, who is brother io-law to the defentrant,
claimed payment of a bond. for. executed in i 7 f. and
interest from that time, makinti tit all 3291. For the ii:aintitf
it was tutted, that the bond itself was gait', clear, that an
endorsement upon it in I stot . proved the payment of ititcreet
that year, ants that the defendant, a man of Sa, aeknow.
felleed to the clerk of the plaintdi's attorney, on Tuesday
last, that he had never paid it. Tor the defendant it was
contended, that it had been paid, altitime,h the distance of
•tiose made it impossible to alum when is was paid. The en-
• .lersernent was a fabrieation ;it happened to be so dated, that
it was witiiin years of the date of the bond, and of the date
of this action; but it was not written in 180', fur a ropy given
to the defendant by the plaintiff since the action beean con-
tained it not ; farther, it referettl to all account which ex-
pressed nothing of interest, and could not in any way be
connected with the hood. As to the pretended admissinii of
the defendant, the pity wet e to consider drat the clerk had
gone to the defendant's hOllSe 011 pretence of sithticenatoc his
neplicer, .whom they did not call, bat hi reality in order to
•prnp a confession out of the defendant. 'Neither life nor
property Was safe if evidence like this conkd he receive I
lint the tiefemiant hail only denied that he hail over signed
• Smelt a bond, sod with the belief that he hail not, a want of
memory not snrprisiag its a man of 84, lie must have said that
be hail never paid it. The strototteAt circumstance, however,
was, that the plaintilf hail never deinausled payment till 3:
years after the .slate, while he WWI so poor that he was sup •
ported by the parish, aJill while he lived far many years on
she worst terms with the defendant. Verdict fur Ile De-
:feuJant.

"Serottertori.—This t;;:—heileeCited a very high degree of
exuectation, and crowded the Court at an early hour. Just
as it %Va. opened, his Lordship ordered the ladies to withdraw.
it was sprciel jory, Sic Charles Lorraine, Bart. foreman.
Mr. Holt stated, that this was an action brought by Thomas
Carr against the• 11ev. Robert Clerke, to recover compensation
In damages let the loss of his dangliteesservices.
Mr. Seurlett thui addressed the jury :—lt has fallen to my
.Inc to address you on behalf of the plaintiff, whose nufortu-
iiate daughter has been sedneed by the el efeadant. The ac-
.iion is brought on the groomd of loss of service. It is an
action long known to the law of England. It is the action of
•t master to recover compensation for the loss ot'service ocea-
oioned by the seduction of his servant. If that master he
also the father, as the -service is endeared by that relatiou, so
tote loss is greatly aggravated, and die damages must arcerd-
•iagly be higher. The seducer in this case, it gives me the
greatest pain to mention, is a eierg:enan, lecturer at Hexhain,
t roan o"• very considerable fortune, and hut half a year a
widower when the transaction took place. He bail been
married to a daughter of Mrs. Shat'to, at Ilexham, and had
three. chiLlren. He lived at Welwiek, a few miles from
Healtam. But lie often visited in Mrs. Sliafio's house, anti
sometimes was 'lime %sill% his whole faintly for weeks. In
Mrs. Shatto's family was the oinfoi innate daughter• of the
plaiut►fi. I ton aware that a legal objection will b-, upon this
ground, raised by my learnt(' friend, who will contend that
this action cannot be maintained, as the daughter did not
octitally serve her father at the time this transaction occurred.
1 know that this action recount be niainta.ned by a father
whose daughter, of mature age, is at service out °lbis honse.
I know that it cannot be maintained, when a daughter, Un-
der age, ie se:vice without any special intention of returning
soon to her fathers house. But in this case there are peculi-
arities which, I hope, will satisfy his Lordship, and leave the
decision in your lands. The plaintiff is a master tiler. lie
lived till Martiomas, Idle, in Allandale town, to this crtnty.
Ile had allowed his daughter to serve Mrs. Shaft° fur some
time, but with the intention of having her soon bark again in
his own ionise. Besides, being a poet- man, he was assisted
by part of the wages which she received fur her service.—
At the period at %hid) lie removed to Bishop Auckland, he
wished to bring his tlaughtee 'clung with him, and was per
suaded to leave leer only tillasskt May. At that date she was.
in eircinotstaceen which disabled her to serve him. Tile de-
fendant began his rotirse of seduction by pros:live of marriage.
Those promises she did not believe, but often repeated that
they did affect leer sentiments and her conduct. You c.an
conceive, gentlemen, how the solemn declarations of a man
of the plaintiff's age, for lie is nest 50, of a man of hie profess
',ion, the son.in-law of her mistress, and at the very time in
his onotherin-law's house—you can conceiveltow promises so
made could gradually gain the consent, and excite the hopes
of a simple and innocent girl. re made those promises e-
qiient enough and strong enough for his purposes, nit avoided
to enter into .any covenant which could now subject him to
an itetioa for treach of promise of marriage. Of this Mall
kaowmothing but what I know of hint as the defendant :LI
this case; and if I did, I should be sorry to glance at liar be-
yond the necessity of this ease. Atter certain familiarities
bad taken place, he contrived to effect his object. Flow he
did so, I abstain from detailing to you ;I dare say my !raid-
ed friend will, in cross-examination, lay enough of this be.
fore you. She soon afterwards fouled herself• in a situation
which obliged her to write to the defendant ; nut he no
longer regarded her or her letters. It is consistent with
our knowledge of human nature, anti perhaps with the
experience litany of us must have had wish the world,
that men, after a certain age, regard with loathing this
victims of attempts which are aimed at their honour,
and terminate in their ruin. She went to her father's
house, tut her father being poor, and the parish olifseers inter
feeiag to preventa linrden to the pariah, the child seas filiated,
and the defendant itieensequencesave.a bond to the effect at
I.e.st of IMCUI hug the parish from any expense. But to lice
parents na conopensatien has been made. You uill, there-
fere, Gentleincii, take into your consideration what btlUl in
dateagex should he given to the fattier. Were Ito ask a.l:at
would be an adequate compensation to the fattier for the an -
duction of kid Chad, I should ak a most foolish and vain
question. No injury can be indicted upon a man tnore
bitter and lasting, than the iujiny ieteirted on a parent Icy the
*eduction of his daughter. .seduction of a wife is a
most grievous injoiry, yet it is qualified by litany ci rctionstances.
The loss of a wife subject to setiuctiaii cannot hemline-
cornpanied ait ti some alleviating consideration& ; but the in.,
_Hwy of a father by the seduction of his dangliteeste altogether
nocauted and unalleviated. The object of oak affection, his

THE NATIONAL RT±!GISTT.R.

care, hie nrations 'solicitude, is deprived or all that is valuable,
and ren•leied a disgrace and a burden ins teed of an ornament
a joy. lam fed to 'iu•'erstaud that dm defendant is to
attempt to destroy her c' aracter in e Nice to di mush his
own mi•coialitet. if ar. ; tempt of this kind should be made,
I hope volt 4%01 cousid, r it an aggravation, and treat it ac-
rd: ilifigiy. 'Nothing sarely cum he a;. regtet aggravation of
the deorevi injury which cut be inflict ed upon a parent than
to find the hoary ate! la bout-time sednct•tr.atlempting to prove
the aufertittiate gir!'seliaraeter wen-1111, es-before he made it so.
lam aware that use learned (ricer, v not give me another
oPPortuitity of :Wilt essing you, and I therefore dwell the
longer noon this subject. I hope tlic case will go Into your
hands. Yon will consider that a girl preciously blamelesa, be.
hived by her parent., and atfectlnnat•;ly contrihnting to their -
support, was sedneed anti ruined ter the cloak of senctity,
which has often, too often, been ❑sted to cover the whist of-
fzences, and this was done by a malt of considerable fertitne.
You will consider Hie injury to the feelings of a patent, as
well as the loss of service to the master. Indeed I am eanrj-
dent, from the elterietcr of the gentlemen whom I address,
that they will view this ease as I view it, anti consider it one
of the utast aggravated eases of seduction that can be laid
before n jury.
Elizabeth Carr was called into the box, and examined by Sergeant
Hullock•--She a every simple, modest-looking, and rather interesting
young wornam She said she was is s•ears of age when she went
to Mrs. Shrtho's house. That was in i lay, 1415. Her father went
from A Ilandale-to wn to Bishop-Auckland at Martinmas, 1816. She
knew the defendant. His vdrie had been dead half a year when
she became acquainted with him. He lived at IValiviek Hall. lie
visited often at !Wm. Shafto's. Ile had three children, the youngest
then about hell a year old. lie often came to the house wit n her
mistress was front home, and stayed in the house making love to
her, Between Mortirarea :lad Christmas, 1816, he came with his
whole family and guyed some days. He had with hint his cliildren,
two wo•.ncu screauts and two &lieu servants Being pressed to etate
some particular expressima he had used, she said that he bad
often declared that they (defendant anti witness) should never be
happy till they were married. One day when sitting together she
moved to go On bearing one of the servants comMg; he said there
was a day coming when they would not be effete who saw theta.
ilcifore he had come with his family, he had always been twice in the
week at the house, ollen more :requently. Her mistress was ofteu
from home a week or Lin days. His virits were more frequent in her
absence. She had a male child horn on the 2d of September,
1817. The first tines that he It.ai been too intimate with her was
when he broaght his family to her mistress's brtween Martinmas and
Christmas. 1816. Her mother had btea seign;; liar the day that
they rernaveil to Bishop-Auckland. It was then settled that she was
to go to her father's in May. mat it was her duration to do so.
During the time she had been dale she let her father and mother
have part of her wages. She had sent souse money to her father
and given him anise. It was part of her wages. She did not leave
on the lit of May. She had not given notice. She left on the
Ist of June... Atoll because she was not able to serve longer. She
wrote to the defen•lant the day before she left ; she get ho answer.
She was obliged to leave her father's house and to go back to
liesham by time pariahs:them. She lived fox 6or 7 weeks with her
aunt. She was delivered at Mary Nical's, in Realism. Dr. Jet%
ferson delivered her. _

She was cross-examined by Mr. Topping at great length, as to the
names and characters of All the servants. particularly the men ser-
vants in the house. It turned out. however, that the latter were
married men, and had their wives in Ilexham. All the minute cir-
cumstances of her ruin wer. called forth,but they admitted not of de-
scription. It was in his bed room, when she had gone by her mis
tress's order to light his fire.. that the seduction was completed. The
letter was all her own. None assisted her either in writing or dictat-
ing. Sire fairly and readily gave a si.nple negative to every question
as to any other man using liberties with her. She had not gone
from Bishop•Au:ltland to Flexham in a post chaise. She knew Mr.
Bates. The gentleman pointed out was lie Ile was a gentleman.
&at what is his employment ?-11e is a fanner, I believe.
Is he note preacher too ?—I never heard him preach.
Were you never in a post-chaise with him ?—No, never, sir.
She had 51. fur the first year, and Ed. for the second. She bad
given no notice of quitting.
Thomas Pattisaii, butler to Mrs. Shafto, is a married man, has a
rife and family in Hcxham. Ile by accident observed the defen-
dant and Elizabeth Carr in thedining-ruom together. The shutters
were on the outside; they had not beenfastened back, and the wind had
driven them to: he went to opca them, and observed the defendant
having hold of her round the neck, and her band in his other hand.
lie never mentioned this. Ile thought it improper. but apprehended
nothing stick as had happened. He never knew any thing incorrect
in her viaduct.

On his cross-examination he stated, that he was still in Mrs.
Shafto's service, and he hoped in her confidence. lie had not men-
tioned what ha saw till after the bad consequences were known, he
never till then suspected any thing criuunol. Ile ne%er in word,
look, or gesture, took any liberty with her. lie never kia.ed her in
his life.

Here the plaintiff's case v«s dosed.
r.Tlppitig now ()bed Oa! vie ction could rot be maintained-.
Elizabeth Carr had Leen regularly in 3ervice with Mrs. Sharto ;
and whatever Mrs. Mafia might do, her father could not pretend
to have lost her servieu. He cited several c..ses in support of this
objeztloa.
Mr. Baron Wootl.—l am of opir.ion that most undoubtedly tins
action cannot be legally maintained. The loss of service is indispen-
sable to it. In :his case, the daughter had served for two years. and
was in fact entered noon, the third year's service. lam sorry for it,
but the actica cannot b., maintained. _ _

Mr. Sculett.-1 certainly cannot oppose the doctrine laid down by
your Lordship. Nonsuit.

CROWN SIDE.

Mararet Smith, aged 43, was tried for the murder of her male
bastard child on the 4th of June. She lived with her latlter ii a
cottage at earhr.:n. That she had been delivered of a child, was
proved; and two atirgeJas gave it as their opinion that the chttl
harrbeen alive at its birth, and ha:l come to a violent doi,;ned
death.
. Mr. Justice Bayley summed up at *very great length, and with
a manifest anxiety to have the prisoner acquitted. The testimony of
the surgeons-was but the inclirattion of their judgment. When foil
evideoc.! of guilt came before them, they wo.ild look it in the face,
and however distressfully and rclivtantly, they would perform their
duty. But if, where there was any doubt, they returned a verdict of
guilty, it might embitter the last ini:ncati of tiitir life. Verdict—
Not Guilty.
Mr. Justice Bayley—Yon '.:tve given a very right verdict, for t haws
very great doubts of the prisoner's guilt.
She was immviiattly discharged.
James Ilindaugh and John Bambrough were then placed at the
bar to receive sentence of death. Both, toast widely different in age,
trmbled and cried for intrcy in the tuo.t piteous manner. tits
Lordship, with Ilia usual solemnity, thus addressed them :
Yon, James Ilintlaugh, kland there, at toe age of 21, to receive
sentence of death.
Prisoner—O, mercy, my Lord ! Mercy, mercy, my Lord !
Judge.—Do not interrupt me.-41'hc jury, who found you guilty.
anti the prosecutor %morn yoti robbed, stiongly rceruninandisi you to
incrcy, and your aentence will be very greatly mitigated. !.et that
mitigation excite your gratitude, and confirm your penitence. While
'you in sccrecrinal darkness performed the wicked act which has
brought you into your present situation, you knew riot that you left
in the lock which you picked the means of your conviction. You be-
lieved the pieklnck to he entire. Yet the point which was then
broken off, Bashed convictioi. en every mind. it was the voice of