The Sun.
London, England, 1839-05-06 00:00:00

LA W IN TELLI

SECONDARIES'
CAB!. CON.--WIGVELIN V. ~
In this case the plaintiff; who is recto. f` gist teass. ;
sought to recover from the defendant, a sogiciti:l4B"ng
at Bognor, compensation for criminal conversation with his
(plaintiff's) wife. It was a writ of inquiry to assess da-
mages, judgment having gone by default.
Mr. WIGHTMAN was counsel for the plaintiff. He said
that in this case the plaintiff was the Rev. Andrew William
Wiguelin, rector of South Stoke, in the county of Sussex,
and the defendant, Mr. William Wood, a surgeon, residing
at Bognor. His client was the son of a man of fortune
who resided at Bognor, and was a clergyman of
the Church of England. In 1834, at which time the
plaintiff was W years of age, he married Miss Emily
Hankey, the daughter of a gentleman of good family and
great respectability, residing in Portland-place. No
doubt his name was well known to the Jury. He
was connected in business, if not by family, with the
plaintiff's father. The parties were equal in their station
of life, and the match was c msidered to be one of the best
assorted that could be found anywhere. The age of the
lady was 22—indeed the marriake was such, looking both
at the connection between the families and the age of the
parties as to warrant the anticipation of the best results.
The fortune of the lady, which was settled upon herself
was 10,0001. The Learned Gentleman then proceeded to
detail the different places at which his client and Mrs.
Wiguelin had resided. Mr. Hankey had a house a.: Bog-
nor, where the Reverend Gentleman and his lady raided;
it was noticed, after a time that Mrs. Wiguelin had made
frequent absences in the day time under the pretence of
visiting her poor neighbours, which was a duty so pecu-
liarly incumbent on the wife of a clergyman, that her bur. '
band, as the jury might well imagine, had no suspicion of her
real object. It appeared that Mrs. Wiguelin did visit vole
of the poor people in the neighbourhood ; among ttens
was a woman of the name of Parsons, who stood in needlf
medical assistance ; the defendant was the medical ma
who attended her, and it was at this woman's house that
Mrs. Wiguelin met him, and that they renewed their ac
quaintance. Mr. Wiguelin, as the Jury might suppose'
was in entire ignorance of this intimacy, his wife he ti"'
stated to him that sho was engaged in those duties so in-
cumb2nt up') the wife of a minister of the wqrd of God
to perform towards her poor fellow-creatures. That his
wife was engaged in abusing his honour, under the plea of `
administering to the health, both spiritually and bodily, of
the poor of the neighbourhood, he (the plaintiff) could
not be supposed to suspect in the remotest degree. The
first suspicion that Mr. Wiguelin had of the criminal cor-
respondence of his wife with the defendant-, was on the
Nth of February of the present year, when the absence
of his wife becoming of much longer duration than it had
previously been, though it would have been thought that a
sense of maternal duty would prevent her absenting herstif
for any length of time from her infant child, then not mar-
than a year old, search was made for her. Mr. Wiguelin,
greatly alarmed, sent for an intimate friend of the name of
Thompson, to assist him on so melancholy an occasion.
Mrs. Wiguelin was found in a extraordinary condition.
It would appear that some scheme had been projected for
an elopement, but that it had been abandoned. What
had induced the parties to forego the carrying out such a
scheme did not appear. Her condition was most dimm-
ing, her state of mind bordering upon distraction. She,
however, refused to return to her husband, and determined
to go to her father's house, which led to the develoipment
of the whole melancholy case. Of the fact of adultery
there was not a doubt; indeed the defendant had not
denied it. He did not appear by his counsel to vindicate
himself, nor to urge anything in mitigation of those
damages to which they (the jury) might consider his
client entitled. He should prove to the jury that there
was no reason to make the slightest imputation upon the
conduct of Mr. Wiguelin as a husband or a father. Ile was
living with his wife upon the most affectionate and attached
terms to the very moment when he made the fatal disco-
very; and then came the proofs at once upon him, and he
was now left alone with his infant child to deplore the loss
of the mother and the wife.

After some further observations the Learned Counsel
called his witnesses; the principal one was Lucy Parsons,
who was so ill as to be unable to attend. Her deposition
was read by the usher of the Court. It was to the follow-
ing effect (the deponent, Lucy Parsons) had known
the defendant, William Wood, from his boyhood. Mrs.
Wiguelin visited her, she (deponent) bcfng ill, and had
given her 4s. when she had nothing to eat. It was at de-
ponent's house that Mrs. Wiguelin and the defendant re-
newed their acquaintance. A room was afterwards provided
for them, in which they used to be alone daily for two or
three hours together. Mrs. Wiguelin used to inquired the
room was ready. There was a bed in the room ' • and when de-
ponent went into it after Mrs. Wiguelin and Mr. Wood had re-
tired she always found the bed tumbled, as if two persons had
been lying upon it. The deponent then wept into a detail
of circumstances connected with her entering the bed-
room upon a particular occasion. The circumstances,
which are altogether unfit for publication, completely esta-
blished the fact of criminal connection between the par-
ties. The deponent further stated, that she had lard
them talking about elopement upon almost every occasion
that they visited her place. Mrs. Wiguelin frequ4tly
urged the necessity of a speedy departure, and expressed
a wish to leave he husband and go off with the defendant.
She said she was fearful of being discovered. The defend=
ant wished to wait till after the Duke's party. ANs. Wi-
guelin appeared to be dissatisfied with the proposition.
Deponent had seen Mrs. Wiguelin gave money tlithe
fondant, and bring him bottles of wine. The pa.,-M used.
to meet each other at her house, for about three Inepths.
Sometimes Mrs. \Viguelin left the house first, and some-
times the defendant; titkethey never left together.
From the cross-examioition of the deponent it appeared
she said that Mrs. Wiguelin had sent on more than one
occasion for the defendant. Deponent's daughter bad
fetched him. She (deponent) had hearl, Mr. Wiguelin
and defendant talk about his (defendant's' having been in
Horsernonger-lane Gaol for debt. She (deponent) thought
the defendant was poor, and knew that his father was.
Mr. WIGHTMAN said there was further proof of crimi-
nality, if further proof were needed. This, he believed,
was tufScient, and with the evidence he should close his care.
The attorney who attended to watch the case on the
part of the defendant said that he did not consider himself
instructed in the matter, and should therefore not address
the Jury. With respect to the circumstances of the de-
fendant, be believed the fact was that he was Plo poor to
employ either attorney or counsel.
Mr. Secondary JAMES then proceeded to sum up.
The Jury then retired. After a short absence the re-
turned, and

The Foreman said the Jury wished to know the nature
of the settlement of the 10,0001.

Mr. Secondary JAMES said there was no evidence on that
point. Had they made up their minds as to their verdict ?
The Foreman said they had, in favour of the plaintiff.
Their verdict was for 4001.

BAIL COURT, 1114 r 4.
(Before Mr. Justice WILLIAMS.)

THE QUEEN V. THE MAYOR AND CORPORATION OF TRDRO.
Mr. BUTT moved for a mandamus against the Mayor
and Corporation of Truro, commanding the Mayor to hold
a Court for the election of auditors and assessors for that
borough, who, by some misconstruction of the Act, bad
not been elected on the day appointed for that purpose.
His LORDSHIP granted the mandamus, absolute in the
first instance.
THE QUEEN V. THE MAGISTRATES OF CAMBRIDGE.:
Mr. GtraNEy moved for a rule to show cause why a man-
dames should not issue, commanding the Magistrates of
Cambridge to examine and allow the accounts of the over-
seers of Fordham during the past year. It appeared that
the Magistrates held their special sessions on the 16th of
April, and on the accounts being presented certain items,
amounting to 300/. were objected to. The Magistrates seemed
to think the objection well founded, but inquired if they were
disallowed how the overseers could get back their money.
The Magistrates were informed that the Act imperatively
required them either to allow or diZallow the accounts, but
they refused to do so, unless they wero compelled lay a
mandamus.—Rule granted.
EN PARTE EI.WELL V. THE BIRMINGHAM CANAL COMPANY.
Sir F. POLLOCK moved for a rule to show cause why a
mandamus should not issue against the Birmingham Casial
Company, calling upon them to show cause why they re-
fused to pay compensation for injury done to the property
of Mr. Elwell, by withdrawing the water from his welrks.
His LORDSHIP granted the rule.

THE QUEEN V. TIIE INHABITANTS OP STOKESLEY.
Dlr. TEMPLE moved for an attachment against tha inha-
bitants of Stokes/ey, for not making a return to a driinda-
runs calling upon them to assemble and make a grant fur
lighting an watching that town.
His LOItDSIIIP granted the application.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, M4r 3.
A NEW REGULATION-John 'William Heron, an Efr.
cise Officer, was opposed in person by a Mr. Sandell. The
insolvent had been a number of years in the Excise ; he
was arrested in March, and on the following day was dia.
missed from his situation ; he said the Board of Excise had
pacscd a rule, that all officers who were arrested should
lose their situations. The order extended to all persons
in the Excise ; his situation had been filled up, and he be-
lieved he was the first person on whom the rule had been
put into operation. He bad a large and sick family, and
had struggled to pay his debts.
The COURT ordered the insolvent to be discharges.

„
A LORDLING'S JoKE.--The Marquis or, %tiqa.-
terford, whose freaks in various parts of the country haie
been rendered sufficiently notorious through the press, is
at present on a visit at Eglinton Castle. We are not
aware that either the door knockers or the sign-boards o
Irvine have suffered in consequence, but some anecdotes,
highly characteristic of his Lordship, are in general circu-
lation. For the authority of all these we will not vouch, but
we believe the following may be relied upon :—Walking
in the neighbourhood of Irvine, a few days ago, his Lord-
ship met a poor woman carr3ing a child, and accosted
her thus :—” Well my good woman, will you sell your
child ?"—" No I can't part with my child," was the answer,
" Why not ? you must be very poor, and little able is I
support your child ; if you give to me I'll bring
him up nicely for you, and make something of him. I'll
give you two guineas tr the child." The woman again
refused, but after 1t g repeatedly told how nicely be
would be "brought up," she at last consented to put tho
child under his care. "John," the Marquis called out to
ire-
proachingly, his servant, "take this child and hang it up on that tree,
—won't it make a d—d fine shot ?" The poor woman
the Marquis
almost fell into hysterics at this astounding proposal,h ispm
r 0 ando
.
began to cry bitterly. ,li.k uidOeh)_3:u v
see,",oleo ,
e gallant saidspoiled
o i
lMarquis,ed
want, your
eyho?u,r,
acnhdildawbaryousgtlai
amused at the effect of his joke, leaving the two highly
y l
guineas,g
however, in the woman's hands.— Glasgow Ar 9 us.
CURE FOIL HYDROPH VfrrOßlA.—Kill
in the world. A rernjedy nearly as effeetutk ' eatheY (og
fore-
goingl. is a *Mall quantity
of summon sodse well rubbed
into t a
he tender parts of the persor, "
affected. Let this
plan be persevered in till the salient became sensible of
the absurdity of bclievio,
in apparitions of
merely fabulous hni
When he knows that:, mad-dogs.
-ddaongzseranndeedr slonger
si rani,'
war!
hended,