The Sun.
London, England, 1864-12-14 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE—This Day.

COUNCIL.

COURT OF DIVORCE,

(Before tie Judge Ordinary and a Spec!al Jury

STONE V. STONE AND APPLETON.

defence.

The Judge—You did not see Mrs. Stone until a
month after her confinement P

Witness,.--Not until a month after.

The Judge Ordinary---Can you tell a month after
the birth of the child whether it is a seven months
child or not ?

Witness—Yes, I can. There are various appear.
antes to enable me to do so.

Cross-examined—She had no doubt about her
ability to tell the age of an infant. She never told
Dc Bishop that Mrs Stone's conduct towards Mr
Appleton was slaumeful. She would swear that
whethtr Dr Bishop was in court or not.
Susan Marks said she was for some time in the
service of Captain and Mrs. Stone. She went in
October, 1859, The evidence of this witness was
in many important particulars a direct contradiction
of that given by the witness Harris examined for
the petitioner.

The case is not expected to conclude to da

Extraordinary Libel Case.

DUBLIN, Tuesday Morning.
One cf the most extraordinary trials which have ever
taken place in Ireland was commenced yesterday before
Chi I.Justice Monahan and a special jury. The case is at
hearing in the Court of Common Pleas, the same court in
which the story of the Yelverton marriage was first related
to a jury and the public. Many fancy that the present affair
is not without features ci resemblance to that celebrated
case; but however this may be, there is no doubt that the
interest felt in the trial now pending bids fair to outrival the
interest felt at the time when the town rang with the name
of Theresa Longworth and her matrimonial wrongs. The
title of the pending case is Travers v. Wilde. It may be
premised that the plaintiff is a young lady of about 25. She
is the daughter of Dr. Travers, who holds the situation of
sub-librarian in Marsh's Library, and who has gained con-
siderable fame as a scholar of antiquarian tastes. There are
two defendants, Sir Wm. Wilde and his wife. Lady Wilde is
—nominally, at least—the princir al defendant. It was stated
in court that her husband's name had been joined with hers
merely for the sake of complying with legal forms; but it
will be seen that Sir William Wilde occupies the most pro-
minent place in the proceedings, so far as they have gone.
Sir William Wilde was formerly Doctor Wilde, and re-
ceived the honour of knighthood very recently, partly in
acknowledgment of his high reputation as an oculist and
twist, and partly because he had been one of the census
commissioners. Lady Wilde is an authoress in her way,
and has written several poetic pieces under the name of
" Speranza," These, then, are the parties to the action,
which is one of libel. Mary Josephine Travers, spinster,
seeks to recover £,OOO damages from William Wilde,
knight, and, Jane Francesca, his wife, for a libel written by
the female defendant to the father of the plaintiff. This is
the letter which Lady Wilde sent to Dr Travers about his
daughter Mary—

Tower -Bray, May 6.
Sir—You may not be aware of the disreputable conduct
of your daughter at Bray, where she consorts with all the
low newspaper boys in the place, employing them to disse-
minate offensive placards in which my name is given, and
also tracts, in which she makes it appear that she has had
an intrigue with Sir William Wilde. If she chooses to dis-
grace herself that is not my affair; but as her object in
insulting me is the hope of extorting money, for which she
has applied to Sir NVllliam Wilde, with threats of more
annoyance it not given, I think it right to inform you that
no threat or additional insult shall ever extort money for
her from our hands. The wages of disgrace she has so
basely treated for and demanded shall never be given to
her. JANE F. WILDE.
To Dr Travers.
To this charge, which the summons and plaint repre-
sented as a libel on the character and chastityof Miss Travers,
the defendants pleaded several defences, the substance of
some of which it may be necessary to give, as they are not
only very peculiar, but go a great way towards explaining
--from the defendants' point of view, of course—the nature
of the action. After the ordinary defences that the letter
is no libel, that the words were not used in a defamatory
sense, that there was no publication as alleged, and that,
if there was, the publication was privileged, there is ano-
ther plea, which declares that the plaintiff, having taken
umbrage at some supposed slights put upon her by Lady
Wilde. set herself to insult and annoy the female defendant
in various ways. Among other means adopted towards
that end, it was alleged that Miss Travers had published
" a certain scandalous and immodest pamphlet, under the
title of ' Florence Boyle Price ; or, a Warning, by Speranza,'
thereby causing the public to believe that such publication
_ _

was the composition of Lady Wilde,who had previously been
known as an authoress under the name of Speranza' in which
she (Miss Travers), under the assumed name of Florence
Boyle Pric€, would make it appear that a person therein
styled Dr. Qnilp (whom the plaintiff afterwards admitted
to have been Intended for Sir W. Wilde) had made an at-
tempt upon her virtue; and that, in furtherance of her
design, she caused divers doggerel verses and additional
articles to be inserted in a newspaper called the Dublin
Weekly Advertiser, signing some of them with the assumed
name of Speranza.' " It was also alleged that Miss Tra-
vers had sent several insulting letters to Lady Wilde, and
had endeavoured to expose Sir W. Wilde to ridicule and
contempt, by issuing placards and handbills against him
on the occasion of his lecturing in the Metropolitan Hall,
to the Young Men's Christian Association; that the pla-
cards bore the words, "Sir Wm. Wilde and Speranza ;" and
that the plaintiff employed wen to ring hand bells, so as to
direct attention to them—that she had further "caused
divers persons to sell copies of the same immodest pam-
phlets, falsely alleging it to be the intended lcctdre of Sir
William Wilde, theraby causing great disturbance and
confusion at the place where the lecture was to be de-

livered ;" and that she subsequently invited public atten-
tion to this circumstance in the newspapers. The defence
proceeded to allege that the pamphlet had been offered for
sale, and sent to the house at Bray, where the Wilde family
were residing, as the plaintiff would "have it to be believed
that she had had an intrigue with Sir William Wilde."
It was also averred that on ssveral occasions, before the
writing of the alleged libel, the plaintiff had applied to the
defendants and " threatened more annoyance it' her requests
were not acceded to." Lady Wilde further pleaded her
bone fide belief that the plaintiff "had disgraced herself,"
and that her object was to extort money, and that, in order
to induce her father, Dr Travers, to use his parental autho-
rity over her, she (Lady Wilde) had written the letter
without malice, and in the hope of stopping the insulting
proceedings; and her ladyship declared that she believed
the statements contained in the letter to be true. Such, in
substance, were the pleadings, as opened by Mr Quin.
Serjeant Armstrong stated the plaintiff's case at con-
siderable length, After adverting to the social position of
the parties concerned, the learned gentleman said that in
1854, the plaintiff, being threatened with deafness, was re-
commended by her physician to consult Sir William Wilde,
who enjoyed a high dharactor as an aurist. She was then
about 19 years of ago, and most interesting, both by reason
of personal beauty and mental culture." Sir William pre-
scribed for her, but would not take any fee, and an acquaint-
ance sprung up between Miss Travers and the Wilde family,
and she often visited at their house when they had com-
pany, When she had first seen Sir William Wilde he lived
in Westland-row, but he afterwards removed to Merrione
square, a more aristocratic quarter of the city. Sir William
had made Miss Trevers a prevent of a season-ticket for the
Exhibition iu 1859, and she used to go to the theatre with
his children. The I. arned sergeant "did not mean to say
that at this period Sir William ever entertained any inten-
tion of assaulting the virtue of the plaintiff, but, no doubt,
an intercourse extending over seven years gradually exerted
its influence, and raised in his mind a guilty intent."
Sergeant Sullivan (for the defendants) here interposed.
His learned friend was making the action--• which was vir-
tually one against Lady Wilde, with her husband joined
for farm's sake—a vehicle for an attack on Sir William
Wilde. The male defendant was "not in any way placed
in a position to answer any insinuations that might be
thrown out against him." Lady Wilde, in reply to the
allegation that she imputed unehastity to the plaintiff,
denied that ever she had done so, having merely.written to
her father with the object stated in the pleadings, kir

JUDICIAL COMMITTEE -OF THE PRIVY

(Present the Lord Chancellor, Lord Cranworth
Lord Kingsdown, and Sir Sohn Romilly.)

- .
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF THE LORD
BISHOP OF NATAL AND THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE.

Mr. James, of the Chancery bar, this morning
opened the arguments on the appeal of the Bishop
(Colenso) of Natal.

The learned gentleman was proceeding when we
went to press.

The re.boaring of this case was resumed this
morning by the examination of witnes for the

The first witness called was Anne Caution, who
said she was a monthly nurse, and that on the 17th
of llf cember, 1861, she was engaged to attend upon
Mrs Stone at Exeter. The lady was unexpectedly
coLfined on the 2d of January in the following year,
There was no preparation for the event.
The witness was closely examined as to whether
the infant was full grown, but she said she could
not tell.

Ann Martin, another nurse, said she saw the

ledy and her infant. The child was in the nurse's
arms when she Rent in. Mrs. Stone and the nurse
asked her to look at the child. She did so. She
opened it and examined at it. (Laughter.) That is,
she "ondone" its clothes and looked at it. It ap•
peared to her to be a seven months child. She felt
positive it was so.