The Sun.
London, England, 1847-07-02 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Jtvie 30.
(Sittings at Nisi Prius at Westminster, before Mr. Jus-
tice WIGLITMAN and a special Jury.)
THE QUEEN V. SEPTIMUS RAMSA.Y, CLERK.
Upon this case being called on, only two special jury-
men answered to their names. The absentees were

fined IN. each. A tales was then prayed on behalf of the
defendant.

Mr. Sergeant Shee and Mr. Bodkin appeared fur the
prosecution, and Sir F. Thesiger and Mr. Boville were
eounsel for the defendant.

This case excited the greatest interest. The Bishop
of London, and sevpral other gentlemen were on the
bench.

Mr. Sergeant SMEE, in opening the case, stated to the
jury that this was a case of the very highest importance,
and he begged their most calm, and patient, and dispas-
sionate attention to it. The defendant is a clergyman

attending St. Michael's Church, Burleigh-street, Strand,
and he was called upon to answer a charge of having in-
decently assaulted Mrs. Emmerson. It would appear
that the husband of this lady had formerly been in
business at Bristol, but was unsuccessful, and, his wife
having a very fine voice, she determined to take advan-
tacit:, of it, and she accordingly engaged herself in the
choir of several churches in London, and thus obtained a
livelihood for her family. bhe was about 29 years of
age, and the mother of five children. In 1845 a proposal
was made to her by the defendant to leave her then
situation, at the church in the Savoy, and accept an
engagement to lead the choir in his church. She acceded
to this, first to sing only in the evenings, and afterwards
mornings and evenings, in St. Michael's Church. She
had not been long there before the defendant sent for

her to the vestry, and, upon that occasion, he endea-
voured to take improper liberties with her. It was to
be regretted that she had not at once disclosed this to her
husband, but, feeling that if she did so she must lose
her situation, and her children must starve, she refrained
from doing so, and the defendant had taken advantage
of this, and had several times repeated his conduct, until
it had arrived to such an extremity that she felt she
could no longer keep it from her husband, and she at
once charged the defendant with his conduct, the matter
was brought before the churchwardens, and then this
indictment was preferred.
As we give the evidence at great length the speech of
the Learned Counsel, which was merely a statement of
the facts, is abridged.
The following evidence was adduced :
Charlotte Emmerson—l have been married twelve
years. My husband was formerly in business in Bristol,
and was unsuccessful. I then turned my talent of sing-
ing to account. I was leader of the choir at the Savoy
Chapel from 1843 to 1845. In the latter year I made
an engagement with the defendant to sing at his
church in the evening. I attended there, and after-
wards gave up the Savoy Chapel and attended alto-
;ether at the defendant's. After I had been at the

defendant's six or eight months, in July I was sent for
to the vestry, and I went there; it was in the evening of
a Sunday. In the vestry I found Mr. Ramsay. I was
talking to him about making arrangements to sing in the
morning. He had his surplice on. He said he must
have a kiss. He kissed me, and behaved indecently to-
wards
fordsr I met.holugthot someldhim onetowould
remember
comethe
in. I
position
rushed
esed
wash
from him, dragged myself from him, and went up into
the organ loft. On the following Wednesday ho sent
for me, and I went down into the side aisle, and Mr.
Ramsay came to me there. He said he had very nearly
got into a dreadful scrape through last Sunday evening;
that he had received a letter stating that he had been
seen taking liberties with a lady in te vestry, and that
that lady was one of the choir, but that I need not be
alarmed, as, though the letter was addressed to Mrs.
Ramsay, he had got hold of it and had answered it in
the name of his wife, stating that the lady was his
cousin. He said he believed the letter had been written
by one of Deville's men. I was then residing in Liver-
pool-street, Walworth. The defendant called there about
two months after this, between three and five o'clock.
owf a
sM eau i nage
qwu
aaisn
tautn
eme y
ofh o unisye
oAn ptehrusto no
eoofa
stihone name
ie
husband's, and was in the kitchen at the time.
I opened the door, and showed the defendant into
the parlour. I went into the front parlour with
him ; the folding doors were open. The defendant
said he was very happy to think he had got my
husband into a situation, at Mr. Hunt's, 10, White-
hall, and he should only expect me to pay him by
giving him a kiss. He then endeavoured again to take
indecent liberties with me. I resisted. The struggle
lasted about five minutes. He then turned it off, and
began to talk, and begged me not to say anything about
it. My husband afterwards went to Mr. Hunt's. The
,lefenda.nt was in the house altogether about half an
hour. Mr. Manning afterwards questioned me as to
what had taken place, and I told him of the def'endant's
conduct. I was at that time pregnant. I had four
infant children living. I saw the defendant on
the following Sunday. He said that on going home
from my house on the Wednesday a little boy
had struck him with a crowbar, which had made
him very ill. I was confined in April, 1846. The de-
fendant called at my house about three months after my
confinement. I was then living at Warwick-place, Pim-
lico. He then stayed about twenty minutes or half an
hour. He. then took liberties with me by kissing me
lad pulling me about. He came again in October, at
one or two o'clock. He then proceeded in the same style
he had before. He endeavoured to pull me on to his
knee. I resisted him very strongly, and he said he
would soon take that modesty out of me, and exposed
his person. It is impossible I can state what else he
did. He did nothing more. My husband was then in
for
re
him. One
T hoe;
In the beginning of the present year some differences
tt
defendanthhee efimr fm (3w yah saodf aMpmreosecsmur rsbeedAr thatcokfe rtau. taßn ia'ou ain
ns
ay's congregation.
arose between the choir of Mr. Ramsay's church, and I
addressed him a letter ; and the defendant shortly after-
wards called upon me, and destroyed the letter I had
written him. I wrote to him in consequence of my
salary having been some time due, and I told him that
I had been very ill, and it had cost me Sd. every Sunday
mtoygsoaltuoryth, eancdliuh ; thatlrtchooght he h
it
would be
vehehrryttnsuerfeh reduced
or him to
have paid my salary, for I had heard many things about
his character that had astounded me. He told me he
had come to ask me what I had referred to about his
character. I told him I had heard he had ruined his
nursery-maid, and sent her to Canada ; that she had
since applied to come home, but he had sent her 50/. to
keep her there. I told hill Mrs. Ward, the pew-opener,
had said so. Ho made no reply. I then said I had
heard remarks about him and Mrs. Ward. He asked
me if I thought it was likely ; that if she had been a
young woman of thirty it would be a different case. He
said he thought he should turn her out of the church.
I told him to be careful what he did. I then told him I
had heard her say if he did discharge her she would
blow him to the devil. He said, " Well, I must be
careful what I do, and I had better burn this letter "
(alluding to my letter) ; and he then burned it. This
was on Monday or Tuesday. I went to the church next
Sunday, but did not sing, and the choir was discharged.
A letter had been sent me, from--Mr. Jones, the church-
warden, dismissing the choir, and I then wrote the de-
fendant this letter:—
" In answer to Mr. Jones's letter, I wish you distinctly
to understand that we have given the choir an engaee-
ment for twelve months. As regards myself, I suppose
you have been calculating whom it would be most expe-
dient to get rid of, me or Mrs. Ward, but if you do not
pay the 251., you will find to your sorrow the result, and
unless matters are arranged to my satisfaction before
Sunday I shall make my husband acquainted with all
your conduct, and I would rather see you in the claws of
a lion than in his."
I then received a letter from Mr. Manning, the de-
fendant's solicitor's :
" eth of January, 1847.—1 have been consulted b
Mr. Ramsay and his friends on the slanderous reports
raised by you, and particularly respecting a very extra-
ordinary letter which Mrs. Emmerson addressed to Mr.
Ramsay, and which, if brought before the proper au-
thorities, would lead to the conclusion that it was an
attempt to extort money. As the offence charged is a
very serious one, I would caution you in a friendly spirit
to avoid a repetition of the same, but, at the mime time,
in justice to the character of Mr. Ramsay, I must call on
you and Mrs. Emmerson to retract, in writing, all your
slanders and reports against that gentleman ; otherwise,
it will be my painful duty to adopt such proceedings,
both civil and criminal, as will lead to ruinous conse-
quences. With regard to the salary, I shall be in a posi-
tion to transmit it.'
That letter was received by my husband. On the Sun-
day afternoon another letter came from Mr. Manning
" In furtherance of the view we mutually took of the
matter, yesterday, and with a desire to afford an oppor-
tunity for explanation, I have arranged a meeting with
Mr. Ramsay, Mr. Ackermann, and the chapelwardens,
at my office to. morrow; and I beg to invite you and Mrs.
Emmerson in a friendly spirit to attend such meeting.
I shall not act professionally, but only assume the part
of a friendly mediator."
My husband and myself attended at that meeting at
Mr. Manning's house. We did not take any friend
with us. I found there Mr. Ackermann, Mr. Ramsay,
the two churchwardens, and Mr. Manning. Upon our
going in Mr. Manning said my letter insinuated many
things against the character of Mr. Ramsay, and they
had met to know what was the fact. He said it ap-
peared to him it was the effusion of an angry woman
because I could not gain my end. It was then pro-
posed, that if I did not like to state all the facts before
all the gentlemen, he would request my husband to re-
tire with two ,of the married gentlemen. Mr. Manning
had asked me if I could adduce anything against Mr.
P.amsay. I said I could. He said, " Has he ever taken
any liberties with you?" I said " Yes." He then pro-
posed my leaving the room with two married gentlemen.
I then said to Mr. Ramsay, "If he had had as much
regard for his own character and the church as I had
he would never have brought me to that meeting; that
he had brought me there, and that I was bound to
speak the truth as ho had tasked me to it."
He made no answer. I then retired with the
two gentlemen, Mr. Manning and Mr. Jones. Down to
that time my husband was not aware of the particulars
of what had taken place. I made a statement to the
two gentlemen, and they retired into another room, and
then into the room of the meeting. The defendant was
in the latter room, and Mr. Manning then said that Mr.
Emmerson had a wish that all I had said should be de-
tailed before all the gentlemen. That was done, and I
asked the defendant if he could say it was untrue? He
made no reply, and Mr. Manning repeated the question,
and the defendant said, "Of course I deny it." This
July, end of
believe, tieoefvre
jneuiuenif
was in January last.
Cross-examined.—I can't fix the time when I was first
lijeuvley, that the e!ooe:,,ka,g:acea.t the defendant's church. I was singing at
gyenadttlaatanhttme'ls church in the evening only up to the lat-
e conduct o
and wasfthe
the last
defendant Sunday
firstin
dyesfae
enteredlnadr
defendant's
wti,usatsoohstulh.reeahe.yn• egaltrtgfweon
Ira singingsenotn, rat
hoerinn3i theno 4ths