The Sun.
London, England, 1862-03-27 00:00:00

acted illegally in acting as attorney ants' advo-
cate, and that he had been guilty of illegal
maintenance. He (Mr. Kennedy) would enlaa
;,hide
cep
wee a ease that must be establiehe.d by
evidence, and not by a speech, and he would
deal very shortly with the opening. He sought
to recover 120,000 for services which he had rare
dered, and rendered under the most extraordinary'
circumstances. For those services the female defen-
dant had herself promised the amount named to him,
and had signed a deed for that amount. The service
he had done the defendant was to restore her to
large estates, known as the Swinfen Estates, and
to that cause he had devoted some of the most valu-
able years of his life, meeting- with all kinds of ob-
stacles and opposition, making many enemies, and
at the same time sacrificing the most valuable pro-
spects of his life. During the firma he was conduct-
ing the case the defendant made the most liberal
offers and promises, declaring that e'he would be a
sister to him, and that she would nsa
should
consnete him
for all he suffered in her cause, and tlieel"
He
be. H
share her good fortune Whatever it might .
never made any ungenerous or illegal ail:
he
with her. He only made such a bargain as 12;s ser-
vices entitled him to. After 1859, when the decree,
was made that established her in possession of her
property, she agreed that he was entitled to this
remuneration, and soon after that she executed a
deed at his request, giving him a reversion in the'
estate. This deed was at first intended to be secu-
rity for the sum proposed, but at her request it was
put into the form of an absolute gift, and sbe de-
clared at a later period that she regarded it beyond
a question as an acwal gift. They had not on the
defendant's side pleaded the deed as an answer to
the charge, and they sought now to take from hint
the money by sayin that the
deed was not a gift.
No complaint was made until Ocate 1861, and then
she not only broke her other prcu:ises to plaintiffs
but she sought to take back from hie' her own gift.
She wrote a letter to him to give the deed up on the
ground that be had obtained it by fraud. In the rage
of the moment, for her conduct nearly drat,-
e him out
of his mind, ho resolved to publish the whole facts
of the case in a pamphlet, and to show her conduct
to the whole world. That pamphlet was to have been
called " The Serpent of Swinfen," but by the advice
of his solicitors and friends he was brought to a
calmer tone of mind. This woman sent to him her
solicitor, Mr. Collis, a highly respectable gentle-
man, and Mr. Collis showed him (plaintiff) a letter
in which charges were made against him by the fe-
male defendant, and Mr. Collis offered him £lO,OOO
if he would give up the deed, and he refused, not
only because it was not what be was fairly entitled
to, but because he would make no surrender of his
legitimate claim after what she had done. He had
determined to vindicate his rights. His position was
peculiar, and if the deed was void he would not have
been paid for his services. If he had taken no steps
to vindicate himself it might have been said that he
admitted the charge of fraud, and at his death there
would have been nothing to protect his children
against the allegations made by the defendants, and
he did not know at that time how far he was safe
fected by the marriage settlement made at the mar-
riage of defendant with Mr. Brown. He would have
been content had they left him the deed. It now ap-
peared that that marriage settlement was a gross
infringement on his rights, and instead of carrying
out what that deed contained they charged him with
these indictable offences. They sought, when they"
found he was determined to go to trial, to move the
venue to London, which would have postponed the
trial for some months. They did not succeed, and
then they filed a bill iu equity, and in filing this bill
they wade affidavits totally differingfrom the female
defendant's letter of November. The letter said
" she did not know what she was doing when she
signed that deed, and that it was a black transaction,
and so Mr. Collis and the attesting witnesses
thought." The affidavit alleged that the deed was
given for another purpose, and was to be returned;
that the female defendant frequently asked him for
it, and that he refused to give it up ; and it accused
him further with deliberately trying to get a will is
1859, making the most ungenerous use of the infle•
ence which he had obtained as her counsel. There
was one most remarkable thing in the affair. 101 the
persons who had made terms to him had made everi
effort to keep things from the public gaze, and the
only person who was really anxious to have a the*
rough public inquiry was himself. There was an;
other circumstance stranger still, to which he would
call the attention of the jury. if he was guilty et,
what the defendant had charged him with she had
been perfectly aware of it for several years, and he.
would show the jury, not only by his evidence. lA,'
by her own letters, that he and the defendant had
continued to be on terms of intimate friendship frote
that time to October last. He had no desire to
more than to vindicate his character and assert his
rights, and if the defendants would withdra w their
pleas and put on- the record the deed, or if they Pre:
ferred it pay the present value of the deed, he we,„ le
accept it for the purpose of avoiding public scand'llt
He had no fear that any human being would believe
any of the things brought against him, and he would
prove to the satisfaction of the jury that what the
female defendant had sworn to the affidavit in
Chancery was a mass of untruth, and he would call
before them Mr. Collis. He did not know what
they would say, because the deed was not executed
in his (plaintiff's) presence ; but he would only re;
peat that he never heard a complaint about the deco
either from the female defendant or from her trus-
tees under the deed, Messrs. Collis and Hewitt.
They were honourable men, and he had no doubt
they would report to the jury what was done with
regard to him (plaintiff). The female defiandant
first of all said she did not know what she was do-
ing, and then she said that plaintiff held the deed
as security, and when he received £2,000 he Was
to give it up. Plaintiff was never asked for the deed,
and he would prove that he had performed the ser"
vice for which it was given, and the jury would see
that in a fair commercial point of view the
charged was not unreasonable. Having reference
to some seven years afterwards, £20,000 paid to hill;
now would not be worth more than £6,000 paid
then would have been, and the jury would see that
he would be no great gainer by the bargain if he
got the money, when they had heard the evidence.
if he could only have known what would happen
he would not for 120,000 have to undergo what he
had already undergone in this case.
[Mr. Kennedy was under examination when the
court adjourned.]
----..••••••■••

FORBIGN MAIL PACKET L 181:

MAILS DUE.

Aup'cralia and Mauritiu;;;;SouiCaMpton. April 18.
via Marseilles April 13'
Brazil and Cape Verds, by British packet. April G.
Cape of Good Hope, Ascension, and St. Helena April 1.
China, Penang, and Singapore, via Southampton April 4*
via Marseilles April 4.
Falkland Island,: April 6'
Gibraltar, via Southampton .. Mar. 2S.
India (Calcutta), and Ceylon, via Southampton April 11.
via Marseilles Mar. 29,
India (Bombay), via Southampton Mar. :4'
via Marseilles April 4.
Lisbon
Malta, Egypt, and Aden, via Southampton Mar. 2"
via Marseilles Mar. 29.
Newfoundland
Oporto and Vigo
U. S. and British N. America, by Brit. packet., Mar. 21.
by U.S. packet
by C
W.C. of Africa, Madeira, April 10. and Teneanriffa packet
edian
AprilM 21u6:.
Bahamas, via New York
Mexico ....Mar. 31.
All parts
and British West Indies, inocllunudiibni.
gaChili, Peru, i Mar. 31.
California,

WASTE PAPER.--The waste paper of the Govern'
ment offices, which is collected and sold by the Stationerr
office, produced above £7,000 last year, and is expected to
bring nearly tho same sum this year. This is indepondee
of the " blue books" printed, but not sold, which, after the
lapse of a certain time, are disposed of as waste paper by
Mr. Hansard.

BIRTIIS.
BYIIAIII.—On the 24th inst., at Ealing, Mrs, Geo. 8y118133P
of a son.
DAWSON.—On the 21st inst., at Nice;Mrs. Massy Dawsalit
of a daughter.
PEAMERTON.—On the 24th inst., at 4, Cleveland-terrace'
Hyde-park, the wife of Charlas Pemberton, Esq., of 0.
- - -

son. '
&MITI:MON.—On the 25th inst., at Bodicote Grange/11°9X
I3anbury, Oxfordshire, the wife of Bernhard Sautuelsol9
Esq., of a daughter.

MARRIAGES.
KElR—BALront.—On the 25th inst., at St. Mary's, Baal/
S. Keir, Esq., of Burnside, Elgin, and late of Kandy'
Ceylon, to Katherine Sarah, widow of the late George O.
Balfour, Esq., of Hescome.
VTSE—VYSE— On the 20th inst., at Christ Church, Luta'',
Beds., Faulkener Vyse, third son of T. A. Vyse, Esq.)
Roupell-park, Streatham, to Clara, second daughter of
the late Richard Vyse, Esq., of Luton.

DEATHS.
BAxics.—On tho 24th inst., at Bolougue-sur-Mer, ITarrioty

widow of it T. 0. Banks.
CoorEß.—On the 24th inst., at Honloy-on-Thames, Philip

B. Cooper, Esq., aped SO
EWART.—On the 22d inst., at. Cads, Robert Ewart, Esq./

of Allershaw, Dumfriesshire.
FOWNES.—On tho 26th inst., at Battersohnenry Fewness
Esq., aged 71.
LINNEY.—On the 26th inst., at Bucklaud-crescent, Belize.
park, James A, Linney, Esq., aged 39. -
STEWAnT.—At 9, Canning-Placo, South Kensington, Good
C. Stewart, Esq.
Ile-
23,aglNeldor6n7i.ngton-road,
S gent's-park,
ti crOa
rilk Evan
•

Lorsrilox: Printed and Published by JOHN CHAPLIN'
of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at TILE Stiii Office, No. 11z:
Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the CountY °I
• Xiddloexi—l'lztiociay, Marc, 27, 1602,