The Sun.
London, England, 1853-08-06 00:00:00

JSSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

HOME CIRCUIT.-CROYDON, AUGUST 5.

ATKINSON V. I3ALDWIN.

The above cause. was resumed this morning at nine
o'clock, before the Lord Chief Baron and a special jury.
Mr. M. Chambers, Q.C., Mr. E. James, Q.C., and
Mr. Bovill were again present on behalf of the plaintiff ;
and Mr. Serjeant Shee, Mr. Ballintine, and Mr. Knapp
for the defendant.
Evidence was now adduced for the defendant;
Mr. R. S. Tomlin said—l reside at Peterborough,
and am the father of the plaintiff's wife. She is now
31 or 32 years of age. Mrs. Atkinson was married in

1840, and she is now visiting a branch of my family. J
did not approve of her marrying the plaintiff in the first
instance. I , used., to see them frequently after that
event, and at' a certain period I Was not satisfied with

the. conduct of the plaintiff towards his wife. Six
months after the marriage I first noticed this. He was
generally agreeable to the other members of the family
in their presence, but he spoke disiespeetfully of me,
and of her other relations, to my daughter and llsiliaved
very rep ulsively to her when, they were alone.._
daughter very frequently made complaints to me of his
conduct. In consequence of those complaints I had
communications with the plaintiff, and I made him pre-
sents, with a view to induce him to behave more cour-
teously towards my daughter. These complaints were
made periodically, sometimes of three months, and some-
times of six months' interval. My daughter was kept
Without 'Money, and she frequently.iapplied, me for
some. I have seen gentlemen at the plaintiffs house,
and I wrote to him stating that he was acting contrary
to the usages of society, and if he continued to do so I
could not receive him at my house. His conduct was
not to my liking. He used to speak to young ladies in
the churchyard and at his own dinner-table, and I have
heard him speak disgustingly upon the subject of women
in his wife's presence, and have heard him say that
married women in London were worse than single
ones. His language at times was so unpleasant to me,
with reference to women, that I have frequently left
the room. I remember the family being at Ramsgate in
1852, and as the plaintiff said he could not afford to pay
the expense I provided him with money for this purpose.
He repeatedly applied to me for large sums of money,
but I was cautious, and only provided him with small
amounts. I remember Mr. Baldwin being introduced
to the plaintiff, and I used to call at their lodging with
my carriage. Upon one occasion I heard the plaintiff
say to his wife, " Get out of the way, Poll ; here come
the old folks ;be off with old Baldwin. I spoke to the
plaintiff respecting Mr. Baldwin in February or March,
1852. He was ill at the Vineyard at that time. The
plaintiff insisted upon his wife taking some gruel and'
some pills into his bed-room. I asked him if he knew
what he was doing ? I afterwards again objected to his
allowing Mr. Baldwin to be so much with his wife, and
he said I was a squeamish old fellow, and he should have
Mr. Baldwin to live with them altogether if he pleased.
Upon another occasion I again referred to the subject of
the attentions of Mr. Baldwin to his wife, and he said
again that I was squeamish, and that my squeamish-
ness would prevent Mr. Baldwin from getting him a
situation. He likewise made some disgusting observa-
tions about his wife's health, and he did not care about
Baldwin or twenty other men being with her. I again
mentioned the subject to him, and he said he would not
lose the friendship of Mr. Baldwin, for he had more in-
fluence than I or twenty people in the county possessed.
The'plaintiff showed me a placard, which he said he had
shown to some one, and they had had a. good laugh over
it. The placard was put in and read ; it was as
follows :
" To be seen in the Minster precincts a large monkey ;
it appears much dejected from the loss of its mate, which
has been taken away last week by an old M.P. who has
been lurking about the locality for some months ; some
wag has made the monkey look very ludicrous, by placing
on its head a brown wig and a pair of spectacles. We hope
the authorities in the Precincts will have this animal taken
care of, fearing, in a moment of despair, it might attack
and alarm some of the pretty nurse maids who occasionally
walk in the vicinity."
Examination continued—l understood the placard re-
ferred to the plaintiff and to Mr. Baldwin. The plain-
tiff used to wear a brown wig and spectacles.
Cross-examined Mr. Baldwin never dined at my
house at Dane-court. I would not invite him there. I
did invite him to my house at Peterborough. It was at
Mr. Atkinson's request, as he said that Mr. Baldwin
was a great gun. I was so disgusted at last with the
conduct of Mr. Atkinson that 1 would not permit him
to come to my house. My daughter was sometimes
called Poll by the members of her family. I was of
course aware of the nature of the evidence that I was to
give` here to-day. I don't think rime din.- •1 1t ►n.
twice at the plaintiff's table durinettie .e .• • ven
years. Upon one occasion the disgusting lan: age I
11 have referred to was made use of in the presence of Mr.
Baldwin. Gentlemen only were present, except on one
occasion when the ladies were also there. I cannot say
positively that the ladies were there. Some years ago
I have met ladies of the first distinction at my son-in-
law's table. I was averse to the marriage, but my
daughter was continually pressing me to consent to it,
and lat length did so. She never told me that she was
very much attached to Mr. Atkinson, but I don't re-
member her saying that she would not have any other
man. My daughter was fond of society, and shortly
after the marriage she went out a gO9fl deal. I gave
the plaintiff a carriage for their journey-to Wales. At
one time they kept other carriages, a footman, coach-
man, and page, and I considered they were living beyond
their means. lam not aware that this was the cause of
his subsequent embarrassments. Since the plaintiff has
brought the present action against Mr. Baldwin I have
sued him for the sum of 50Z., and he has paid the money.
I could never get either interest or principal from him,
and I consequently instructed my attorney to sue him.
At one time he owed me 1,2001. but he paid the amount.
On another occasion he repaid me
2001. I had lent to
him, and when he repaid me I returned him 1001. At
the time he separated from his wife all he owed me was
501., and that amount he has paid me. I never threat-
ened him with an action of ejectment to recover posses-
sion of the Vineyard estate. Ile was himself desirous
to leave it, and I told him I should make it a matter of
business, and I should let it, and hand him over the
rent. I don't remember whether my wife accompanied
me to Mr. Atkinson's house at the time Mr. Baldwin
was there the last time. I don't remember whether Mr.
Baldwin escorted my wife into the town for the purpose
of shopping at this time. I knew that my daughter had
a bill of 801. or 1001. with a milliner in London, and I
paid it for her. Atkinson afterwards gave me a note of
hand for 521.—a part of the bill—and I gave him the
remainder. This was the 50/. that I have claimed of the
plaintiff since this action has been brought.
il he ee • I knew no.
thing of Mr. Baldwin unt as introduced to me by
Atkinson as his " great gun.'
Re-examined—A settlement was
never executed, because the proposed, but it was
plaintiff did not come for-
ward with a sum of 5,0001., which he undertook to pro-
vide. I then consented to give -- my daughter the Vine-
yard estate, which comprised the house he lived in, and
a rental of about 300/. besides.
Mrs. Tomlin said—l am the wife of the last witness.
At the time the marriage of my daughter with the plain-
tiff was proposed, I very much objected to it. After the
birth of the second child, which took place two years
after the marriage, the plaintiff treated my daughter very
unkindly. He was always repulsive, and never treated
her kindly or affectionately. He kept her short of money,
but kept hunters for his own amusement, and did not
appear to begrudge himself anything he required. His
conduct towards her was such as to render her very un-
happy. She did not make complaints, but I was very
observant of what was going on between thenti.
Cross-examined— I did not like Mr. Atkinson before
the marriage. His manners satisfied me that he would
not make my daughter a kind husband. He met my
daughter the first time at a country ball at Stamford, and
he afterwards requested permission to pay his addresses i
to her. I visited the plaintiff's father, but it was against
my wish. I disliked the family altogether. I don't know
whether my daughter entertained any particular affection
for Mr. Atkinson. The courtship went on from Novem-
ber to August, 1840, and when they were married in
that month they went to Scotland. After their return
it was of course natural that I should go to visit my.
child. The visits were always unpleasant to me. (A
laugh.) I did not like the conduct of the plaintiff at all.
One carriage was kept for the use of my daughter. The
conduct of the plaintiff to me even during his courtship
was unkind, and my daughter observed it, and_ cried in
consequence. When I paid the last visit to Mr. Atkin-
son, at Peterborough, Mr. Baldwin was there, and he
accompanied me to a" shop, where I made some pur-
chases. I have not seen him since my daughter left the
Vineyard.
Mr. Percival—l am a solicitor practising at Peter-
borough. I remember the election taking place there
in 1852. The placard that has been produced was
itwell
generally posted over the town, I called Nelry andr. At-
understood to refer to Mr. Atkinson.
kinson's attention to it, and told him that he ought to
take some steps respecting it.
By Mr. James—lt was not a Whalleyite placard. (A.
laugh.) It was disowned, however,
i both by the Fitz-
william and the Whalleyite party n the city. I showed
the plaintiff the placard, and obtained one on purpose.
Mr. James —That was kind. (A. laugh.)
Witness—l said to Mr. Atkinson
thatiton
ife het showed
Mr. Mr. Tomlin the paper, and the insult
his wife, he would probably vote for .AtaLlinsont's
candidate. My object in showing the placard was to
get a vote. The author of the placard was not known.
It was disowned by every one.
Mr Banks Tomlin said—l am a brother of the plain-
tiff's wife, and I was formerly a captain in the Ist Dra-
goon Guards. I saw the plainitiiffe,reapnedateldleyoantsitdheer cmonir.-
mencement of their married f
virema
rsd. uAntgkei nn ts loen-
Atkinson treated his wife mda.n unkindhil n
manly manner at that perio
was at Ramsgate, I frequently
Mr. Baldwin and the child saMwrh. eArtkwinalskoinngrawreitlhy
one occasion I asked him
accompanied them.
re lied, "I dare say you
where my sister was ?Ijapnodndhe
ee ch
plaintiffi ldre n owna
st the
will find her with Mr. Bel win
hpaennd
tthh
sands." Upon one occasion, w

The next letter was dated the 13th of April, 1853,
which, it appeared, led to the defendant going to Peter-
bourough and the subsequent interception of his letter
to the plaintiff's wife. It was as follows :
" My dear Baldwin,—We shall be happy to see you here
as you propose on Saturday. Let us know the train you
come by. You'll have to put up with very indifferent fare
and attendance indeed ; for with no cook and no servants,
and all in a muddle, it's a shocking coming down in the
world, but I much fear me it's not the lowest depthl have
arrived at-yet—muse verrons : but I am tolerably careless
now and almost desperate. We'll talk about your Totnes
business, and shall be happy to render you what assistance
I can ; and shall be glad if Mills be unseated, though I
hope he'll come to terms, by paying your expenses, &c. I
am afraid, with you, that the secretaryship would not suit
me. I could not give up my matters here for the sake of
2001. a year, which of course I must do to be always at my
post in town. As to the sort of people I should come in
contact with, I'd swallow that, for when occasion requires
I can suit myself to most companies—high or low, igno-
rant or informed, good or bad."
This closed the case for the defendant.
Mr. Chambers then proceeded to reply upon the evi-
dence that had been adduced, and in tha,cpurse of a
very able speech he contended that his learned friend
had certainly failed in making out the case, he had
opened, and that not a single tittle of evidence
had been adduced to support the allegations he
had made against the plaintiff. It was perfectly
clear that the family of the Tomlins entertained
most adverse feelings towards Mr. Atkinson, and
he said that it was a most unnatural exhibition for
a father and a mother to come forward, as Mr. and
Mrs. Tomlins had on the present occasion, to assist, and
endeavour to save the pocket of the man who had un-
doubtedly destroyed the honour and the reputation of
their child. With regard to the fact of adultery having
been committed, he said that if any doubt could by pos-
sibility exist upon that subject, after reading the letter
of the defendant to this unhappy lady, the other testi-
mony he had laid before the jury established it in the
most positive manner ; and it appeared to him that the
only question the jury bad to decide was the amount of
damages that ought to be awarded to the plaintiff for
the injury that had been inflicted upon him by a man
whose age and position in society were grievous aggra-
vations of his crime.
The Chief Baron, in summing up,. said be did not be-
lieve the jury could entertain any reasonable doubt that
the defendant had in reality committed the offence im-
puted to him ; and the only remaining question for
them to decide was the amount of damages the plaintiff
was entitled to receive for the injury be had sustained ;
and in estimating those damages they must take into
consideration all the circumstances of the case. He felt
himself called upon to remark, however, that he had
never heard of a charge of this description being brought
forward, in which not a single female witness, either
lady, servant, acquaintance, or of any other descrip-
tion, was not called to tell the jury under what circum-
stances and upon what terms the husband and the
wife lived. It was very important for the jury that they
should be informed upon this subject ; hut in the pre-
sent case no such evidence was laid before them, and
from the period of the birth of the second child down
to the year 1849, when the defendant appeared to
have been first introduced into the plaintiffs family,
there was an entire blank, and to a certain ex-
tent the jury were utterly in ignorance of the terms
upon which the plaintiff and his wife lived. The
learned serjeant in his eloquent speech for the defendant
had certainly made out a very strong case against the
plaintiff ; but lie was bound to express his opinion that
the evidence he had brought forward had failed to sup-
port his statement, and that it by no means made out
that the plaintiff had intentionally forced his wife into
the society of the defendant in the expectation that she
would yield to the temptation he had prepared for her.
Although, however, the evidence had failed in this re-
spect, yet undoubtedly there were many circumstances
proved on the part of the defendant, which the jury
might very fairly take into their consideration when they
came ,to estimate the damage which they considered the
plaintiff had sustained, and to those circumstances lie
would shortly direct their attention. The learned judge
then referred to a most disgusting expression spoken to
by Mr. Tomlin, as having been made use of by the
plaintiff, in reference to his, wife—to the circumstance
of the placard, and some such matters narrated in the
evidence for the defendant ; and he said the jury would
consider whether a man who could make use of such an
expression in reference to his wife, and who had acted
in the other matters in the manner deposed to by the
witnesses, was likely to treat his wife with proper con-
sideration and kindness ; and whether the intimacy be-
tween them was likely to be of a kind or affectionate
character. These were circumstances to be considered
as relating to the question of damages, and he said the
jury would no doubt give them their due weight, and
return a verdict in accordance with the facts before
d beinginto inoo
ndretl i bweirtaht ino nv
earbdoiuo
tt
them.
t:owrTe
til i
tieeyJp u,
min,ar
iynottiefrs retired,
thpo
aya
mnrdao
gtne afterrns I os.

THE JULY FAIRS IN WALES.—The fairs held
month throughout the Principality have been extremely
good and well attended. The supply of cattle has, in
most instances, been limited, especially of store cattle
and, with a fair attendance of purchasers, the amount
of business transacted has been such that little, if any,
has been left unsold at the close of the day's proceed-
ings. In most places the demand has been far beyond
the supply, while, on the other hand, at several fairs,
though the exhibition of fat cattle was limited, yet it
was quite equal to the demand, the price of beef being
so high that but few cattle were killed. All other de-
scriptions of stocH have been eagerly bought up, in
order to fill the shambles of the butchers. Milch cows
have realised high rates. Stores have been in great
request. Good horses have been bought up at most 1 BETTING- no=----uss— e Bill on Betting Houses as
s.
y printed. Only a few trifling
remunerating prices. The rates for vegetables have also
amended was prianting have been made. The day
been very high. The various wool fairs have been well
alterations a
attended, and the present high prices have been kept up.
on which it; to the
to take effect has not been inserted.