The Sun.
London, England, 1854-06-21 00:00:00

her riding-habit since she left the defendant ; but on the
3rd of June, when she was out, she had heard that some-
body had brought a parcel, but witness had forbade them
to take in any letter or parcel for her. Mr. Levi ,:e told
her not to receive anything until this action was over. She
first saw Mr. Levine at Mr. Cooper's, who she should think
was an attorney.
Mr. Serjeant Miller—Has not Mr. Levine lived with the
woman whom you lived with?
The Chief Justice—Of all the people within the four
seas, why should M. Marmaysee throw dirt upon other
people? You might as well ask whether the attorney or
attorney's clerk lived with the woman, and put the same
case with reference to the barrister and all the jury. (A
laugh.) If it is necessary, take your own course.
Examination resumed - She knew Madame La Roche,
but had never told her that all she claimed was the riding
habit, and that it was Mr. Levine who claimed the money.
She knew Madame Colbert, and had seen her at the Argyle-
rooms several times ; but had never told her that it was
Mr. Levine who was claiming the money. Mr. Levine
never told her that he had got a diamond ring worth 15
guineas from M. Marmaysee by threatening to indict him,
nor that he could get her some money by threatening an
action.
Be-examined. by Mr. Serjeant Byles—She did not know
whether Mr. Levine was a married gentleman living in
Keppel street. He never slept at Madame Caroline's, to
her knowledge. She had been seduced at Paris, her father
and her mother having both died, and she having been
left an orphan. When she left the defendant's she had no
money ; and she could not tell the value of the things the
defendant let her take away ' • but they consisted of the
clothes she had on, and several little things besides. All
the houses of ill-fame at Marseilles, Lyons, &c., were under
the surveillance of the police. At the defendant's house
she saw the man who had seduced her, and that was not
long after she went there.
This was the plaintiff's case.
Mr. Serjeant Miller said he thought his lordship and the
jury would be of opinion, after what had appeared in this
case,.that the defendant was not quite so bad as he had been
represented. It had been said that his house was a place
where young women were taken to be seduced, and that the
defendant purchased young women for the purpose of pros-
titution; but his lordship would see that as far as this wo-
man was concerned, the place was merely an asylum offered,
and such an one as persons of her description would very
often be happy to get. It having now been satisfactorily
proved that the defendant was not a person carrying on
the sort of practices—the very grievous practices—that his
learned friend had referred to, he thought it desirable to
withdraw the case from further consideration. The de-
fendant was prepar, d with his books to show that there
was a balance due to him, from this wretch's account, of
61., and that he did not owe one farthing to this person ,•
but, sooner than have the case further discussed, he would
consent to allow him to accept an offer made by his learned
friend, and so withdraw the case from further discussion.
There would therefore, by consent, be a verdict for the
plaintiff for 301.
The Chief Justice said he was not aware of anything
proved in this case which supported what had just been
stated ; but, on the contrary, be thought that the evidence
entirely justified the statement of his brother Byles. He
did not say the defendant kept a house where young women
were seduced, but he said that he carried on the disgust-
ing practice of having young women in his house, and
cheating them out of all they got, by keeping their money
and not allowing them to purchase anything anywhere else
but of him. It had been proved that these statesments
were justified ; and if the case had gone on, and it had
been found that the defendant kept a house of this kind, he
should have ordered him to be indicted for keeping such a
house, and to be kept in prison in the meantime. (This
announcement of his hardship was- followed by a burst of
applause from the audience, which was however at once
suppressed by the officers of the court.)
A verdict was then entered for the plaintiff for 301., and
the case ,kas brought to an end.