The Sun.
London, England, 1809-07-25 00:00:00

sria7.oßD

The Assizes for this county commence& on
Thursday last. The highly-respecled Sheriff, THE-
OPHILUS LEVETT, Esq. was attended to the town by
a numerous body of friends, who afterwards dined
with him at the Swan. There:were only nine pri-
soners for trial, and twenty.-two causes, three of
•
which were Special Juries.

CLARKE V. RA/ILSTONE.
SEDUCTION.

This was one of 'the most interesting trials at
these.•Assizei. It was an anion brought by -the
Plaintiff, Mr. Thomas Clarke, of. Wolverhampton,
against the.Delendant, Mr. Thomas Rai'stone, of,
the same place,. to recover datnages for 'he seduc-
tion of the Plaintiff's daughter. The principal cir-
cumstances, as given in evidence by the• daughter,
who is between is- and 19 years of age, were,
that the Defendant, a near neighbour of the. Plai-
ntiff, became acquainted with her, in consequence of
her visits to Hannah Taylor, who resided with the
Defendant :as- a servant. It appeared that the` De-
fendant's wife had eloped with Col.,Bedioglield, for
which he had received from the Colonel 40001. da-
mages ; and the Defendant, in order to insinuate
himself into the good graces of the young lady, re-
presented himself as willing to-marry her at the death
of his wife, which he stated as likely to happen
very shortly. By these
,promises lie seduced her.—
After the seduction had taken place, she was de-
sirous of giving up the connection, but was' induced
to renew it in consequence of the Defendant threat-
ening to make her sister and a person of the nameof Ellis, who'paid his addresses to tier; acquainted
with her conduCt, unless she repeated her viSits..—
The consequence was, that she did, and proved
with child. She afterwards went to her friends at
Birmingham, who applied to the Defendant to give
his bond engaging to marry her'at his wile'S death ;
which he refused to do. Other circumstances 'were
given in evidence, which would be improper in t*s
to state.

The Plaintiff's daughter was crOstt-examined at
considerable length by Mr. JERVIS, who attempted
to prove' that the religious education:- of the, Plain-
tiff's daughter had not been properly attended to—
and that she had permitted Ellis to sit up with her,
after her father had gine to bed ; bUt in this he fail-
ed. Beside the Plaintiff's daughter, one witness only
was called in support of his- Case, to 'prove the re-
fusal of the Defendant to enter into any engagement
to marry her ,after h)s wife's death;. ' and that, upon
the girl's friendreipostulating with him as to his
condual, he admitted that he was much to be. blamed.
Mr. JeavlS addressed the Jury, on 'behalf of the
Defendant, particularly adverting to the improper
acquaintance 'of the Plaintiff's daughter with Han-
nah Taylor,- whom he stated to be an unfit per-
son for her to associate with ; to the negled of the
Plaintiff in giving his daughter
,a religious educa-
tion ; and his suffering her to visit the Defendant,
whom he knew to be a married man, living sepa-
rated from Ms wife; and, in support of the latter
part Of his argument, he cited the case of .Reddie
and ScoOlt,. Peake's Nisi Prius, 240.

_•
The Judge, in Summing up, in,the first place,
took notice of the case referred to by Mr. Jervis,
which he said did not'apply to the present question,
as there was no evidence to, show that the Plaintiff
was acquainted with the Defendant's .attentions to
his daughter. , He then took
.a most perspicuous re-
view of tlie case, giving it 'as his opinion, that the
girl's mind was not debauched previously to her
sedualon by the Defendant ; that it by no paeans ap-
peared that her father had. negleEled her religious
education, but had, on the contrary, attended to it;
reminded the Jury, that the Defendant had admitted
that blame was imputable to him alone, and con-
cluded by recommending them, in nixing the da-
mages, to attend to the maxim 'of doing *unto others
as they aVould others-should do unto them.
The Jury consulted sorhe few minutes, and re-
turned a cerdiQ for 3001.
- There were many curious circumstances which
were brought forward. at this 'trial. The Counsel
for' the Defendant attempted to shew that it was a
custom in Wolverhampton for women to be fiiken on
leases, and that the Plaintiff had offered his daughter
to the Defehdant on these terms,".-This, however,
was not proved. Some pulling of caps and very un-
lady-like terms appeared in the evidence, which-af-
feeted the„clairns of the Plaintiff in a very considera-`
ble degree.
Miss Clarke appeated an interesting and well-
dressed gir4 and gave her deppsitions in tears.