The Sun.
London, England, 1862-12-20 00:00:00

(Before the Lord Chief Justice and a Special Jury.)
HUDSON V. SIR P. SLADE AND OTHERS.
This case (the particulars of which will be found in
another column) was resumed to-day.
Mr. John Cale, inspector of the City Police division, 3d
division, the inspector who was on duty at the Fleet-street
station when Mr. Hudson was brought there, was called as
the first witness this morning. He said that Mr. Bagshawe
charged Mr. Hudson with stealing a book, and he then in-
sisted that Mr. Hudson should go into the felon's dock.
Two or three other gentlemen were there. Mr. Rodwell
was one, and he believed Sir Frederick Slade was there.
Sir F. Slade (laughing and standing up)—l am Sir F
Slade.

Witness—l believe Sir F. Slade was there.
Mr. Collier, who was examinin g the witness—l believe
the witness•is mistaken about Sir Frederick Slade, lam
told that it was Mr. Digby Seymour who was there.
The witness then stated the circumstances connected
with the charge at the station, and the reason why he dis-
missed it. Mr. Bagshawe charged thaprisonerwithtaking
the book, but witness declined accepting the charge in that
shape. Mr. Hudson inquired whether Mr. Bagshawe
charged him with stealing the book, and Mr. Bagshawe
said the terms were synonymous. Witness remarked that
if Mr. Hudson stole the book it was easy to say so. Mr.
Bagshawe declined to say that the plaintiff stole the book,
and witness therefore dismissed the charge.
The inspector, who gave his evidence with the greatest
clearness and propriety, was cross-examined at some
length by Mr, Sergeant Pigott, but nothing of any conse-
quence came out of it, except that he said that Mr. Bag-
shawe distinctly used the word stealing.
By Mr, Collier—lf Mr. Hudson had not been charged
with stealing in the first instance he should not have ordered
him into the felon's dock. He had afforded the defendants
as much assistance as he had rendered to the plaintiff in
this matter.

Another police officer was called to prove the same facts.
Mr. M. Chambers said this was the case for the plaintiff.
Mr. Sergeant Shee proceeded to address the jury for the
defence. There were two issues on the record—first, did
the defendants assault the plaintiff in the way described P
and secondly, did they in their parliament chamber or at
the police-station give the plaintiff in custody on a charge
of felony ? He contended that there had been no deli-
berate, formal, persisted-in charge of stealing preferred
against Mr. Hudson, and that it would be idle to suppose
that the Benchers for a moment suspected that there was,
on the part of Mr. Hudson, an animus furandi, which was
necessary to substantiate a charge of stealing. In fact,
Mr. Hudson made very light of the charge, and was not
detained at the police-station more than a few minutes,
and subjected to no real inconvenience. There was no
evidence that either of the defendants, except Mr. Bag-
shawe, gave Mr. Hudson into custody, and the jury would
have the opportunity of hearing from Mr. Bagshawe what
really did take place at the police-station. Then
came the question—did the defendants assault and
" rummage " the plaintiff? This involved the character
of the plaintiff, and also, however painful it might be, the
character of another gentleman, and also the character of
the dekndants, who were entrusted by the Government
with an important discretion over the members of the legal
profession. Well, then, did they assault and rummage the
plaintiff? No doubt they did, for in this case the maxim
" Qui facit per alium facit per se," and th) Benchers were
responsible for what was done, but he denied that either of
the defendants personally took part in the assault. What
occasion was there for the Benchers to call in their porters
and servants to assist them ? Mr. Hudson was a small
spare . man, and Sir Frederick Slade could have held
him up in his hand without the slightest difficulty
—(laughter)—and so, he believed, could Mr. Bagshawe
have done. They advisedly took no personal part in the
assault, but they called in their servants because they be-
lieved that when a thing was to be done with violence the
more force used the better. In fact, it was the learned trea-
surer who presided who ordered the servants to obtain the
book from Mr. Hudson, but he (the learned sergeant) ad-
mitted at once that all the defendants were guilty, if they
had not a justification for what they had done. The learned
counsel, referring to Mr. Digby Seymour's case, out of
which the present trial arose, urged upon the jury that the
profession of a barrister should not be allowed to be made
a cloak and cover for professional dishonesty, and that a
charge made against any of its members should be sifted
to the bottom, in order that the fame of the profession
might be untarnished. The next point to which
the learned sergeant directed attention was, whether the
papers which Mr. Hudson took were really his, and he
came to the conclusion that they were only his as a director
of the company, writing, with the assumed authority of the
company, to the manager of the mine in Virginia. Mr.
Hudson, he maintained, would not have been justified in
taking away the b, ok containing his instructions to th,:
manager when he ceased to be a member of the board. The
book was the property of the Waller Mining Company, and
havinglbeen handed to the Benchers by one of the officers of
the company was for the time lawfully in their possession.
Mr. Hudson, he urged, obtained possession of the book by
an unworthy and disreputable contrivance in order to screen
himself from the peril of being proved guilty of that which
was only suspected against Mr. Seymour, and to prevent
the Benchers from arriving at a fair judgment.

[The case was proceeding when we went to press.l

COURT OF DIVORCE.
(Before the Judge Ordinary and a Special Jury.)
FOSTER V. POSTER AND BERRIDGE.
This extraordinary case was resumed this morning.
Joanna Mahony, cross-examined by the Queen's Advo-
cate—l was a servant at Mr. Nolan's for about eight
months. I went in 1861, and left in July, 1862. I remem-
ber Lieutenant and Mrs. Ellis and Major Foster coming to
lodge there. I often observed that the major and Mrs.
Ellis went into the lieutenant's bedroom when he went out.
It was my duty to wait on the lodgers. I told my mistress
about it. I assisted to dress Mrs. Ellis in the drawing-
room. I have seen the major there. Mrs. Ellis wore a great
many dresses. The major used to assist me to lace her
dress sometimes, as he thought I could not do it. I mean
her outside dress. Mr. Ellis used to go to bed about 11
o'clock. He used to retire first. Mrs. Ellis and the major
used to sit up after that. Mrs. Ellis used to turn off the
gas at night. After breakfast she generally went up stairs,
where sbe used to remain for some time.
Re-examined by Sergeant BAllantine—Neither Mrs. Ellis
don't IMajo
recollect Fllectosterg
ever calling me a
inghimilY,lhthilegolwdhen major."th lelftu.sedl
to see what I have spoken of because I had to attend on
another family on the second floor. I used to see them in
the major's bedroom on the third floor when I went up
stairs to get an apron. I don't recollect how many times I
have seen them in one day.
Tho Judge—Try and recollect.
Witness--I can't.
The Judge—Well, was the door open ?
Witness—lt was ajar about so much (about a foot and a
half.)

In answer to other questions from the learned counsel,
the witness said—l have seen them in Grant's room. He
was Mr. Ellis's servant. She used to go into the bed
room before breakfast. It was generally an every day
occurrence. The dress I have spoken of was blue ball
dress, and it laced behind.

By the Queen's Advocate—My hands were not too dirty
to lace the dress. The major thought he could pull it to-
gether better than I could. (Laughter.) Mr. Ellis through
illness sometimes used to remain in bed till 11 or 12 o'clock.
He used to go out walking sometimes about 2 or 3 in the
afternoon.

The Judge—How often ?
Witness—l don't recollect.

The Judge—Yes you can.

Witness—l can't remember how often.

The Judge sought to ascertain whether it was Mr. Ellis's
custom to go out of an afternoon, and at what time, but she
would not give a direct answer, and the judge directed her
to stand down.

Mary Ann Bartholomew—l was servant in June of the
present year at Mrs. Norton's, 26, Orchard-street, Port-
man-square. Major Foster, his son, Lieutenant, and Mrs.
Ellis were lodging there. The major occupied the back
room on the second-floor, his son the same room, and Mr.
and Mrs. Ellis the two drawing-rooms, the back one being
the bed-room. They all sat in the front room. Grant's
room was on the third floor. I recollect on one occasion
I went to prepare the major's bed-room, when I found it
locked. I knocked, and got an answer from Mrs. Ellis. She
said I could come in in a minute or two. I did not
wait, but went into the front room on the same floor. I
( saw Mrs. Ellis come ont of the major's room about 20
minutes after I had knocked. It was about half-past nine.
She had her petticoats on with a dressing-gown over them.
After she left I saw Major Foster come out in about five
minutes after. On another occasion I found the same door
locked, when Mrs. Ellis told me I could come in directly.
I waited outside the door for about 10 minu tea, when Mrs,
Ellis came out and went into the drawing-room. In 10
minutes after the major came out. I have besides this
scan Mrs. Ellis go into the major's bedroom before break-
fast, and also at other times. Lieut. Ellis sometimes did
not get up all the day. One day I heard Mrs. Ellis say
4i Go up stairs, major, and I'll come after." In about two
or three minutes after he went. I was setting the tea
things in the room when I heard this, when I have been
going up stairs to bed I have seen Mrs. Ellis coming down
from the major's bed-room. I was
wwoaneitnhesepassed. It
bed. stairs on one
occasion,
aboutySergeant
alb2o
avteEnati
ahe
nt
night.
drawing-room, lenlugth.-
arEvo oel
Ellis
an affidavit in this
s ,
made when h
case before. In that I said I received no answer when I
knocked at the bed-room door. I know a Miss Baylis. I
told her my sister had been spoken to by a lawyer about
giving evidence in this case.
The J dge— Judge—well, el,
.
what did you say
The witness
The Judge—Don't keep us waiting all day.
Witness—l told her my sister was going to be sworn in
hesitated. l
this case, but I don't remember anything else. Sergeant Ballantine—What did you say about the
lawyer ?

Witness—Only that she (my sister) was going to bo