The Sun.
London, England, 1840-12-05 00:00:00

EVENING EDITrON.

are mere delusions. But it is not so—all civi-
lised, all savage, all animate creation repudiates
the blasphemy ! Nature herself rises in revolt against
the libel. She appeals not to educated man for its re-
futation—she appeals to the very tigress fondling her
cubs in the recesses of the forest. Can you doubt that
it is by doctrines such as these, this unhappy lady has
been demoralised? Can you doubt it is by doctrines
such as these that thousands are at this imtant tottering
on the brink of destruction? You have them for the
first time to-day presented by this defendant. I call on
you in the name of Christianity to arrest the pesti-
lence. I call on you in the name of your country,
in the name of the yet untainted, to " stand between
the living and the dead, and stay the plague." I know
not w'aether I have exhausted the tonics of this man's
palliation—there is one, perhaps, behind.- It is possible:
—it is just possible, he may appeal to his inability to
defray the damages. I hopehe will not.
_U he does,
I hope it is but a subterfuge. Otherwise there never
was an act of more cold-blooded and crafty self:lneB6
perpetrated than this. What ! will he tell you tc -day
that be took this lady from a horse of luxury to
pine wt ) him, not only in guil', but in'.'
poverty ? I do not believe it is the case ;:
but if it be, and he should make
last appeal to you, I then call upon you, gentlemen, to)
himbefo rte h
sm affectednniitted
o rthe
realo poverty
him that he should have calculated the penalty'
it
ise ol (a' too e you tnot tellfor
the miseries he has created. I call on you to tell him
that if he cannot expiate his offence here, it is your
duty, counselled alike by every human and divine autho-
rity—it is your bounden duty, to provide that he shall
carry to more congenial climes the contamination of .his
principles, and the peril of their example.
He then called the following witnesses :

The Rev. John Westwood—l live at Burton in Staf-
fordshire. I knew Mr. Wakefield from his childhood.
I know his wife, and am the clergyman by whom they
were married, at old St. Pancras Church, in May,
1818. After their marriage I continued on friendly in-
timacy with them. Mrs. Wakefield was a lady of great
prrsonal attactions, and highly accomplished. Mr.
Wakefield al Kays conducted himself as a kind,
affectionate, and indulgent husband, and Mrs.
Wakefield conducted herself with great propriety
and affection. By their marriage they had three chit-
dren, a son and two daughters. The son dicd—ther
eldest daughter is nearly of age. I have seen Mr.
fi•dd since this misfortune, and he appears
wounded, and his spirits arc depressed, and his mind is
excited and agitated. Before that ho always appeared
to be a very cheerful man.
Cross-examined by Mr. THESIGER.-The family
were very old friends of mine. It is eight. or nine
years since I stayed with Mr. and Mrs. Wakefield, but
I have dined and called repeatedly since. They never
quarrelled in my presence. Mr. Waketiel,l is nimet
forty-three years of age, and Mrs. WakAield is about
forty.

Re-examined.—l never observed anything in their
conduct that led ma to entertain the remotest idea that
they lived upon other than the most affectionate terms.
Mr, Wakefield was not at all a passionate man, but
kind and benevolent in his manner.
The Rev. John Twycross examined by Mr. PHIL..
LIPS.—I have been acquainted with Mr. and Mrs.
Wakefield for eleven years. lam Curate of St. Peter-
lc-Pou, Broad-street. They were in the habit of at-
tending my church. I and Mrs. Twycross vt,ry fre-
quently visited Mr. Wakefield's family, and they. 015-
peered to me to live very happily together. He b;-
peared to be an affectionate husband, and she,
an affectionate wife. Mrs. Wakefield was a lady
of great accomplishments and personal attractions.
It is more than three ;'cars and a half since I visited
them. I have frsqueutiy dined at the table of Mr.
Wakefield. I never saw any in his conduct un-
becoming the habits of a gentleman, nor any undue
ebullition of temper cr excitement. I have seen him
since his wife's departure, and he appb.ars to be exceed-
ingly mentally depressed.
Mrs. Mary Twycross examined by Mr. C,LatticsoN.
—I am the wife of the last witness. I hay.: b6ce
on habits of intimacy with Mrs. Wakefield for
eleven years. 1 always considered Mr. Wakefieh..l
to be a most affectionate husband, and Mrs. Wakefield
a most affectionate and tender wife and mother. Mr.
Wakefield is not at all the same man he was, be is greatly
altered in personal appearance and mind.
Mr. Thomas Alexander Boswell examined by Mr.
Phillips. It have a seat called Crawley Grange, in
Bucks. I have been on terms of intimacy with Mr.
and Mrs. Wakefield, for 14 years. A bout 3 or 4 years
ago, I remained at their house fora fortnight. Had 'beet)
asked to name a family living on the best terms of affec-
tion and unity, I should have named theirs. Up to the
time of Mrs. Wakefield's departure I saw nothing' to
induce tr.e to suppose there was any diminution. of

affection.
Cress examined by Mr. THEstout—The last time
I saw them together was about the close of 1839. When
1 heard of their separation I was struck with astetnish-
ment and dismay. I believe I heard that Mrs. Wakefield
had left her husband's house about February 183 Abut
I do not know that it amounted to a separation. Alter
that time
I heard there was a separation talked of be-
tween the parties. I heard that they had agreed LO
separate in February last, and Mr. Wakefield told me
that he had remonstrated very strongly against it, but
Mrs. AV. had manifested such a determination op Ilan
subject that he had no other alternative. I believe then,
was something said of a man of business being called
in, but I did not hem- that any papers had been signed:.
Re-examined by Mr. PHILLIPs—Up to February,
1840,1 saw nothing in their conduct to lead tug to
doubt of their living happily together.
Mr. John Hensley-1 am a stock-broker, and am
intimately aecruainted wills the plaintiff and his wife.
They were in the habit of exchanging visits with my
family. In July, 1839, Mrs. Wakefield was staying
with us at a place near Henley. Mr. Wakefield
was not with us. They always appeared to be very
affectionate, and I saw no alteration in their feelings.
towards each other up to that time,
Mrs. Hensley, the wife of the last witness exa-
minedbv Mr. PHILLIPS.—WhiIe we were in the country
Mrs. Wait-tic:4d appeared to have the s. me affection
towards her husband she had always shown. Saw Mr.
and Mrs. Wakefieli together about a fortnight before
her departure from her husband's house, and tht7 ap-
peared to be very affectionate towards each other.
George Paveley—l entered the service of Mr.
Wakefield, on the 11 th of March, 1839. Mr. and
Mrs. Wakefield lived very affectionately and comfort-
ably together, and I never heard or saw any disagree-
ment between them. That continued up to within three
weeks before she left. They frequently had parties.
Mrs. Wakefield never went out to a party without her
husband or daughter.
Eliza Merlo..--I have been housemaid in Mr. Wake-
leld's family, a year and eleven months. I used also
to attend on Mrs. Wakefield and the young ladies.
Mr. and Mrs. Wakefield always lived kindly and af-
fectionately toward each other.
George Paveley re-called and cross-examined by Mr.
THEtIGER—I booked a place in the Worthing coach on
the night of the 6th of February. for Mrs. Wakefield
by her direction. She had before directed me to book
a place to Hastings, but there was no room in ,the
Hastings coach. I corded her boxes and brought them
into the hall the snme evening. She left home
between eight and nine o'clock the next morning.
Her daughters took leave of hcr. Mr. Wakefield left
home about ten o'clock that evening, and said he was
going to sleep at Mr. Skcy's, and that he would return
in the moroing. Mrs. Wakefield's luggage was not
brought (lewd till alter he left, and she went away the
next morning before his return.
Eliza Merle re-called, and cross-examined by Mr.
THESIGER—Mr. and Mrs. Wakefield slept together on
the night of the sth. Mrs. Wakefield left on the
morning of the 7th. The young ladies kissed their
mamma before her departure.
Re-examined by Mr. CLARKSON—Mr. Skey is Mr.
Wakefield's brother-in-law.
Mr. Charles Doan—l am an artist. I know Mrs.
Wakefield very well. I remember being requested to
sketch a pencil portrait of her on the 6th of July, 1839.
I sent hcr the portrait within three weeks of that
period.,
defendantl
Jcln Charles i
Mr
aanmdaksntoovicki-ibis lirokacur,i
writing
the
tl i
,
Inever saw him write, butblicaivi. have actede n
letters letters
have received front bins,
shown to be in his handwriting.
_ _

Cross-examined by Mr. THESIGER-1 bought some
Spanish stock fur the defendant about six months ago.
l'he speculation was a failure, and he lust about 3001.
or .iOO/. by it.

lte-r xaniined by
tini Mr. CLARKSON—His speculation/
at different ti
a month agoi dechned
times amounted to 10,0001. Spanish. About
wrote
to
me
to.
purchase somc Porta-
guelk;eri. \Vbut. Edward Knobel—l am solicitor for the plain-
tiff. I remember going on the 23d of April last to a
house at Croydon, in which Mrs. Wakefield was re-
-8)(1ing. The letters that have been shown to Mr. Morris
I got from the possession of Mrs. Wakefield.
Cross-examined by Mr. THESIGER—I received about
50 letters ; the first is point of date was the letter of
the 7th of February. They were tied together with red
silk rinand. 1 have heard from Mr. Wakefield that
Mrs. Wakefield Igft her home about the early part of
1838, and that she was absent for ten days or a fort-
night. I do not know ley whose solicitation she re-
turned. I never hearti that there was a talk of a
would
separation in 1839. I was never employed by Mr.
Wakefield until these procedings. I hoard that Mr.
Wakefield had signed a paper. That .
memo-
randumraenslii:ll\
tsi.sHin
,i the hands
an
nd
(si
hoof
hag r
ePordo ct too rt
h. at I. have aivi ce a
rndotf:oftm
the
iuseintiesndhoodt
proceedings for the Ecclesiastical Court
that Mrs. Wekefield had suggested that. she
paper, to allow
here. I heard
Mr. Wakefield tibeiaactrt,lhicebmhuaatdxiatillgle,rien:hdloa,
ttb.ly a
keep a carriage,‘ - T 1,2 se a
dianacto income
thise.
thatlherie tdlloloaeot:s.hnoaoultdy
do not know what Mr. w,kefit e allowance. I
I was present at the assault on the edldef'
very large. The lower part
s occupied as offices.

tNINC4 EDITION

troydon Railviay. It was a moderate•sized stick. I
d not ace the assault actually take place. I went with
Mr. Wakefield to go to Croydon, and while we were
at the station I siw the defendant. I went to look for
Mr. Wakefield, to get him out of the way of the de•
feadant, aad met him returning from the defendant.
He told me ha had knocked him down. He did not
say he had struck him when down and laid his check
°Pea. The stick was a good-sized canc. That was
or., the 22d April, after the service of the writ.
Ite-examined.—That meeting appeared to me to he
quite accidental. The plaintiff told me it was decidedly
;'!gaiest his wish that Mrs. W. quitted the house. I

did nut ;.ollect from Mr. W. that he had the slightest
susilickan of there I,e'.ng any guilt on the part of Mrs.
«•ak.efiel,l. He sail in consequence of disputes that
had arisen between them in the month of February,
wife had determined to leave his house. lie had
'strongly protested against any such step—that he had
no reason or no cause for his adopting such a course,
but that nothin short of personal restraint would have
prevented her leaving him. He said the disputes arose
free) two, practices his wife had been guilty of—one for
frequen%ty going out alone, and the other in sitting con•
stint) f at one particular window of his drawing-r Gena ;
that, he had noiated out the impropriety of such con-
Which led to irritation and dispute on the part of
; and as he seemed determined to put a stop to
site►, practices, she had determined to leave her home.
I I earned that the result of the separation for ten days or

fortnight was that he had ascertained there was no im-

putation on her character or his honour.

TI F,. letters were then put in and read by the Under-

iV.r. TIIESIGER then rose and addressed the Jury for
the defendant. He said the task of his Learned
Y:ientl was now done, and after the very power-
IA al and impressive spaech on the part of his
Learned Friend, containing some of the highest
flights of eloquence, but very few facts, and after
the evj.lence which he would venture to say had,.

exciccd considerable astonishment in the minds of

the; jury, they should now proceed to ascertain what
w9'3 the real nature of the case before them, and on

w aich their judgment WAS called for by the plaintiff.
'They must understand the position in which the two
parties were before them, and which might, he thought,
have induced his Learned Friend to spare a great deal
of the correspondence which had been used ; because
the defendant had not denied that he had transgressed
the taws—he had admitted the injury for which the
plaintiff sought damages. It was only required of them
calrely and temperately, and dispassionately to ascertain
treeler the circumstances of the case, what was the fair
amount which, in the temper and moderation of the
jury should be awarded. He was aware that it was a
very delicate and difficult task which the jury had to
perform. It was not very easy, as his Learned Friend
had said, to estimate the extent of the injury in
money. His Learned Friend, however, must not
complain of the law (they being the humble mi-
nisters of it), that it had only provided that re-
medy for injuries of that description. They must
carry out the law as it was, and must furnish
the Jury wpth the means of arriving at a satisfac-
tory conclusion. Oa an occasion like the present, it
was the duty of the plaintiff to throw every possible
light upon the case, to give them the fullest particulars
of his character and conuct, and the state of his affec-
tions towards the unhappy woman. The Jury had a
right to expect the utmost good faith and caudoer
from the party coining before them, in order to the
proper discharge of the difficult task imposed upon
them. Cases of the present description were not to be
.tiselucted with the dexterity of ordinary actions at
Nisi Prins. The plaintiff was bound to lay before
the Jury all the circumstances which would enable
them to form their judgment, and if they found that
there had been an ingenious and dexterous attempt
throughout to obscure the truth, to conceal facts which
were ad important for their judgment, they fairly and
properly had a right to say that the plantiff was not en-
titled to the indulgence which he:Ad:led through his ad-
vocate. Let them look at the manner in which the case had
been presented to them. He appealed to them with
;great confidence whether the plaintiff had done all they
Ltd a right to expect from him. The most important
circumstance by which they were to judge the measure
of the damages was the real state of affection between
the parties. Their own experience would tell them that
it was very difficult indeed for a mere strarger to have
any certain information on the subject. In the ordi-
roary intercourse of society there was such a degree of
politeness and conventional decency and propriety, that
whatever might be the feeling lurking within, it was
not displayed in the presence of a third party, Mr.
Dahwood and the other respectable gentleman might
from time to time have visited the house, and been
;staying under the roof, but then respectable society
would check any outbreak of feeling, and intro-
eatree that polish on the surface that fre-
quently hid what was falso and hollow below.
But there were persons who might have been called by
:the plaintiff, who must know many of the particulars
which had been studiously concealed from them, and
-or6oss. his Learned Friend—and he spoke advisedly—
was bound to have presented before them. Why go
to these who were merely casual acquaintances? Why,
,when there were relations who were most intimately
-painted with all the particulars connected with the
f:Taistilc—why were they studiously kept away from the
Jury? Why had they not persons connected in relation-
chip wi • with the parties ? Because it would be impossible to
.conceal from them the real state of the case. There
ma; a brother, a sister, and a sister-in-law, who must
have been in daily and hourly familiarity with the plain-
tiff and leis wife. And yet they had satisfied themselves
ewith calling a few gentlemen and their wives. Their
own experience as men of the world, would tell them that
it was quite impossible that they could know all the
particulars connected with the family. Cases
like the ,present depended upon a great variety of
particulars. They were anomalous, as his Learned
Friend had strikingly and strongly pointed out ; but still
they must measure the damages by all the circumstances
that surrounded the parties. They must show how far
the, husband regarded the treasure he possessed—how
far he conducted himself with propriety towards her.
They were also to ascertain what was the station of the
defendant, as to what means he possessed of paying the
penalty as a satisfaction to the husband, which it was
their province to award. He would now address himself'
to the facts which were not in dispute between them.
Here were two persons who had been married for twenty-
two years—the lady having arrived at the mature age of
forty, and having, according to the representations of his
Learned Friend, a home of perfect happiness—having a
husband dotingly attached to her, dutiful and affectionate
children, and all of a sudden, for no earthly reason
that had been given, a perfect stranger who never crossed
the threshold of the house where she lived, was found
to have obtained an influence over her affections ;
the result was that a criminal intercouse had taken
place between them. That was not in the ordinary
course of things. If the lady had all the accomplish-
ments that had been represerted—if she had all the
genius, and information, and warm and strong affec-
tions which had been stated, one wanted some clue,
some explanation of the mystery which had induced
her suddenly to abandon all these advantages, and
-throw herself into the ems of a perfect strangor. Who
could have told them a little more of the history of that
family ? who could have opened the door, and let in the
daylight? Why his Learned Friend had been too prudent
to call the brother, or sister, or brother-in-law, who were
the intimate companions and familiar acquaintances of the
plaintiff and his wife. She had arrived at that time
of life when the passions do not generally master the
judgment. She had been described as a person of
strong mind, and he might truly appeal to the Jury
must there not have been some reason to induce her to
break through every restraint—to abandon every advan.
Cage, and desert her home of happiness and unite herself
with a stranger, under circumstances which she must
know would expose uer to the constant scorn and in-
famy of the world? It was clear that in 1838 some dif-
ferences had arisen, and his Learned Friend had told
them that there was a suspicion in the mind of
her husband of some impropriety of conduct.
There must have been violent bickerings and heart-
leurnings between them to have induced her to
absent herself from her home for a fortnight. That
fatal word " separation" was never uttered until
months, nay years, of strife, had been passed between
them. That there had been differences between them
'was now clearly in evidence before the Jury, and they
must be aware that things had been pushed very far
indeed before that fatal step was resorted to. They
were not left to conjecture that,
_far they had the evi-
dence of Mr. Kaobel, the plaintiff's attorney, giving an
account of the plaintiff's conduct,
o and putting' the most
conduct favourable gloss upon the
plaintiff
tand character of his
client. Now, what did thecomplain of ? Why,
he complained that his wife went out a greatrodedalhby her-
:self, and that she also sat at the window;
plain of that to her, or did he remonstrate with e cahmer-
upon it ? If be had, what, he would ask, must have
been the state of the affection of the wife at that time,
if she bad not yielded to that remonstrance ? She did
not yield, and did not that show in what state their
affections were at that time ? for could the Jury believe
that, a wife who had an affection for her husband,
mould not have withdrawn all cause of dissatisfaction
on his part ? But could there be any doubt that dif-
feiences, disputes, and animosities had taken place be-
tween the parties which led to a final separation. If
any doubt was entertained upon that, it was at once
cleared up by the parties themselves who had drawn
up papers of separation. Those papers, however,
had not been produced, which they ought to
have been, for the purpose of showing to
the Jury what were the grounds on which the
Parties themselves thought they could not live longer
e.getlser. The plaintiff was content to leave the Jury
ra ignorance of all that, in the hopes that they would
draw
inferences in favour of the plaintiff and against
the defendant. But then it was said that the defendant
bad drawn the wife of the plaintiff into poverty. Now,
what was the fact? Why, the plaintiff himself had
proposed that his wife should go to Worthing, and that
he- "'id allow her the paltry pittance of 1001. a year.
The course that had been taken by his friends showed

that the object of the plaintiff was to deceive the Jury
as to the state of affection that existed between this
unhappy pair. With respect to the defendant,
it was
most extraordinary that his friends had put no ques-
tions to the witnesses relative to his age, or any of those
circumstances which would throw throw any light upon
the matter. As to the lady, she was upwards of 40,
and when they found that sho was throwing her hus-
band off, and becoming, attached to this young
man, he thought his friends ought to have given
a little more information to the Jury than they
had done. He admitted that the intercourse of any
person with the wife of another man very highly crimi-
nal, and the Jury were there to ascertain the amount
of that criminality, and the circumstances under which
it had taken place. Where a party had deliberately
violated hospitality, and seduced the wife of his
friend, was a very different case from that
where the wife was obliged to leave her
home in consequence of frequent quarrels with her hus-
band, and having left that home, having no friend in the
world to look to, clung to a stranger. Now, that was
the present case. There was no evidence of any in-
tercourse between the parties until after she had left
her husband's house. That the parties had known
each other before then, there could be no doubt
but it was clear from the first letter that the
defendant was not aware, in the smallest degree, of the
circumstances under which the lady had withdrawn from
her husband's house. It seemed that for some time the
parties had not been in the most happy disposition to-
wards each other ; that in 1839 they had proceeded far
in their differences—the husband had complained
of her going out alone, and of her sitting at
the window, and, from the whole correspondence,
it was not a strained supposition to imagine that on the
lady's leaving her husband's house she met the defend-
ant, and having no place to resort to she went to the de-
fendant. Such he (Mr. T.) believed to be the correct
supposition ; it was borne out by all the letters, and no
evidence had been adduced to contradict it. Attempts
had been made to connect the defendant with the por-
trait painted in 1829 ; this was a most unfair course of
proceeding ; for what evidence had the plaintiff to show
for whom that portrait was painted? Then what else
was there in the case ? He had been, like his Learned
Friend, in many cases o f this description, but never in
the whole course of his practice did he recollect a
case in which evidence for the purpose of furnish-
ing a criterion by which damages were to be
estimated was so scanty as in the present.
It could not be said that it was the duty of the de-
fendant to give evidence, because he admitted his fault,
he did not deny that he was answerable to the plaintiff
for infringing the law, and interfering with his domestic
peace ; but the plaintiff was bound to furnish the Jury
with all he knew. Now did the Jury believe that they
had before them the whole truth of the case, which
could alone be furnished within the walls of the house
of the plaintiff ? Certainly they could not. Anything
that had occurred between the defendant and the lady
could not be brought forward, because neither of them
could be examined as witnesses. The plaintiff had the
means of furnishing the fullest materials, and if he
withheld them to what other conclusion could
the Jury come, but that there was more in
the case than met the ear, and that the wife
of the plaintiff never could have conducted herself as
had been represented. Here there were twenty-two
years of uninterrupted happiness suddenly disturbed,
not by the intrusion of a stranger, but in consequence
of a wife walking from her husband's house and meet-
ing that stranger. Now, what could be the cause of
that The lady was at an age when she was not
likely to be led away by flattery, and if her home was a
happy one, she would have counted upon its comforts,
and not have deserted them and connected herself with
a stranger. The truth was, and he thought the Jury
could not hesitate to come to that conclusion, that her
home had been made unhappy by the conduct of her
husband, and that in 1838 that step was taken
which put an end to the confidence of matrimo-
nial life. Although it might be true that to Mr.
Dashwood and others, the plaintiff had not exhibited
any violence or oat-breaking, yet that he was violent in
his temper, and that serious disputes had taken place,
was clear from all that had been adduced. The Jury,
he was sure, could have no hesitation in believing that
the whole matter had arrived at such a pitch, that
nothing would do but separation. The wife found at
home coldness, passion, and violence, and was it there-
fore to be wondered at that she should cling to others,
though that connection was not sanctioned by the altar ?
The wife had no friend to turn to but this stranger for pro-
tection from the cruelties of her husband. The did turn to
him ; she became guilty and fell, but under circumstances
of great palliation. The defendant, as he had before
said, knew that he was amenable to the law, and was
ready to submit to the verdict of the Jury, but, under
all the circumstances, and looking to the brutal attack
that had been made upon the defendant by the plaintiff
when the writ was served, he (Mr. Thessiger) trusted
the Jury would think the justice of the case would be
satisfied by a small measure of damages.
The UNDER SHERIFF summed up, and
The Jury, after retiring for about a quarter of an
hour. returned a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages
3001., costs 20s.

The following are the letters which were read during
the trial :

The Chambers, Feb. 7, Friday Nignt.

MY BELOVED AIATILDE,—Never did lon any occa-
sion so long for the hour of meeting, or indulge in such
dreams of pleasure as to-day. I called this morning at
twelve in king William-street, and there was not any
letter ; I therefore concluded nothing new had occur-
red. I passed at least a dozen times at the hour agreed
upon, and yet though I did not see you, I did not con-
clude that you were unable to come. I waited you be-
low here from six till half•past seven. I came up and
sat till nine. I then began to fear I know not what—
to think of retiring to-night without any attempt at find-
ing what had occurred was impossible. I thought some
letter might have since arrived—started off imme-
diately to the City—and there I find you wrote to-day.
There is not any Post-office hour marked on it, so that
I cannot tell at what hour it reached ; nor can I ex-
press, dearest Matilde, how deeply I regret not having
received it before Post time this evening. _

Worthing I know really nothing about, but I very
soon shall know something. Your letter seems to have
been written in the greatest possible haste, and bears
all the signs and tokens of extreme emotion and excite-
ment. I feel happy that you have left, although I could
have so much desired that we should have had this
evening for converse ; but the scenes in which you
have of late played a part, must have been
of so harassing a nature that it is quite
impossible such a system as yours could have
longer borne up against its effects. lam glad, there-
fore, that you are away from your tormentors. Be-
lieve me I feel already I shall strongly miss those daily
glimpses I have caught of you. That moment was a
little epoch in every day. The constant endeavour so to
form arrangements that they should not prevent my being
there at the appointed time, caused it to be constantly
on my mind, and I felt a real and true pleasure when-
ever circumstances permitted that stolen glance, and
disappointment when they did not.
I cannot imagine under what circumstances you have
gone, darling. What arrangements preceded your de-
parture? What preparations have been made at
Worthing for your reception ? Are you at the house
of a friend, or where ? These and a thousand other
questions crowd upon me, and I would have you an-
swer them all this minute were it possible. I feel, how-
ever, that some such knowledge ought to exist on my
part before I make my appearance at Worthing. Had
you told me in yonr letter the coach-office in town from
which you are going, I should have been able to trace
you ; but at the present moment, knowing nothing of
Worthing, or any of its inns, I know not what to say. I
must wait to-morrow, dearest, before I can say anything
about the visit, and how it is to be made, and where I
am to see you. It just occurs to me I may have a letter
ffrom you to-morrow morning. How anxiously I shall
go early to the City. 1 came byre to reside to-day.
I am already thinking how it can be arranged that you
should, ere long, come and pass a few days with me in
this seclusion, but we must be cautious, dearest. You
will, of course, now direct the letters to the office, but
never allow any one to post them but yourself only. I
long to hear from your own dear lips all that has oc-
curred since we met. I thought once yesterday, when
I passed your house, that I was observed very particu-
larly from your drawing-room, but I suppose it was only
apprehension, as my glance was so stolen a one—you
will at least be tranvil now, if not happy, but you will
also be happy too, I ?rope, ere long. The more I re-
flect on what has occurred of late, the more certain I
am that the course you have now pursued was the only
only one left if life was to be preserved, or if it was to
have anything left worth the preserving it for. The
7th of February will be an epoch : who can tell what may
be its results ? Dearest darling Matilda (I feel happy
to have given you a name none other can have ever ad-
dressed you by), dearest Matilda, I shall say good night
to you, reserving the other page for the morrow, when
I hope to be able to tell you the coach, the hour, and
all that may be necessary. A thousand blessings, and
as many kisses, and good night.

GULIELNIO.
Saturday.

I have your letter, my darling Matilda, as the ad-
dress of this cannot fail to convince you. You cau-
tion me against going in the neighbourhood of Old 8.-
street. Can I have been right, then, in my suspi-
cions on Thursday? But it is useless to form conjec-
tures. I will hear all from your own lips. I cannot
state at what hour, &c., I shall be in Worthing ; at
the latest, however, I purpose leaving town to-morrow
morning at nine, by the Worthing coach, though it is
possible I may go down to Brighton to-night, and get
to Worthing early in the morning. In the former case
--viz., that I go at nine to-morrow morning, you may,
I suppose, expect a call from me at or about four or
five o'clock. I have not yet fixed on the name in which
I shall present myself. I think it better not to take
my sister's name of Seymour, but a manufactured one.
It is possible and most probable I may be announced
as
e '
re l‘foirre. , Stciry
you t Yes, I shall
use that name, and,
h iie."
niay prepare, darling, for Mr. Storville's
t