The Sun.
London, England, 1841-08-23 00:00:00

The Counsel for the prosecution not having cross
examined the witness, this closed the case for the de
fondant.

NORTHERN ClRCUlT.—Liverpool, Aug. 19.
CIVIL SlDE.—(Before Mr. Justice WIGHTDIAN.)
HALL V. PROCTOR.
_. .

This was an action of slander ; Mr. Cresswelt and
Mr. Atherton for the plaintiff, Mr. Bamshay for the
defence.
The plaintiff and defendant are, it appeared, both in
' the colour trade in this town, and on the 7th of April
last happened to meet in a tavern in Brownlow-street, in
this town. Some conversation took place between them
as to a proposed sale by the defendant to the plaintiff o!
a large quantity of ochre, and it was agreed that they
should meet to settle the matter on the following day.
Some little time after the defendant came over to the
plaintiff's party, and offered to join them in a game of
draughts. This was declined, and the defendant being
somewhat irritated at the circumstance, in the course of
the conversation which ensued, struck the table with his
hand so violently, as to break a glass. Some jesting
took place as to getting up a penny subscription from
the company to replace it, when the defendant at last be-
came very angry, and addressing tha plaintiff said, " I
am not a poor scrawl like you. I can pay my way,
which you never could do. You're one of the biggest
scoundrels and wastrels in Liverpool, and everybody
knows it. I have heard it from a thOusand. I should
have at you myself, but you're not worth powder and
shot. I know a party will do you up before you're
many days older." The plaintiff, thus addressed, re-
quested some persons who were present to take down
the words, and expressed his determination to seek re-
dress at law for the aspersions thus cast upon his credit.
He told the defendant he did not owe UM to any one in
Liverpool, to which allegation the defendant gave the
retort courteous, " You're a liar." The plaintiff did not
resent this in the manner which such a declaration usually
proirolces, the defendant being without an arm. Some
days after the defendant seemed to have thought better
on the subject, and some mutual friends having interfered,
it was finally agreed that he should retract the expres-
sions, and pay f.g.nr a champagne dinner for a party of
twenty. then expressed in strong terms,
his regret at what had taken place, and intimated his
feeling that the plaintiff had ample reason to have re-
sented the insult at the moment by personal chastise-
ment. Again, however, he changed his mind, and de-
clined to make the amends required. The present
action was proceeded with, and on the writ being served
he reiterated expressions of similar tendency to the
above, saying that the plaintiff was a swindling scoun-
drel, and the greatest scamp in Liverpool, and he could
prove it.

Mr. RAMSHAY, for the defendant, contended that the
whole was a paltry squabble, which shbuld not have oc-
cupied the public time for the period required by the
investigation ; that the defendant had admitted that he
had spoken rashly, and had made use of expressions he
could not justify, but refused to give the champagne
dinner which had been capriciously required of him. He
denied that ho had repeated the slander, as alleged.
A 'verdict was returned for the plaintiff—Damages N.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
GUILDHALL.

A number of females appeared at the bar at the in-
stance of the parochial officers of Sr. Bride's, for whom
Mr. A. Smith, the vestry clerk, attended. The charges
against them were that they kept improper houses in the
vicinity of Fleet-street.
The first defendant called was Mary Ann Gibson, of
No. to. Crown-court, Fleet-street.
City Police sergeant, No 302, stated that the prisoner
keeps a house situated as above. The prisoner acted in
all respects, to outer appearance, as the mistress of the
house.

Mrs. Gibson said that she was only a servant in charge

of the premises, which belonged to another person.
Alderman COPELAND—Perhaps you'll give the name
of your employer. Prisoner—Yes. Mrs. Woodgate,
who lives at No. 3, Star-court, Strand.
She was ordered to find bail, herself in 401. and two
sureties in 20/. each, and to give twenty-four hours' notice
to the City Solicitor, who in this and all the other cases
would be instructed to prosecute.
Elizabeth Dobie, of No. 9, Black Horse-court was the
next person accused by the same officer, who said this
receptacle was open by day and by night. The " esta-
blishment" had been open for years, and the last keeper
of it was a woman now serving her four months in the
Compter for robbing a gentleman.
Witness said he saw Susan Wood take different per-
sons into the house in one day.
The defendant said she had only "presided" there a
fortnight, and she took the situation to support three
fatherless children. She gave in the name of Mr.
Joseph, of Bride-lane, as the landlord of the house, and
to whom she paid the money. She was ordered to find
sureties in the same amount as her sister Gibson. Per-
haps the disclosures they had made would be taken into
consideration at the sessions.
The ALDERMAN directed that the names of the " back-
ground" proprietors should be included in the indict-
ment.

Rachel Goodwin, Sarah Greenwood,
of Nes. 2,3, and 4, liarp-court, were all char-red by the
and Zliza Taylor,
same officer, and committed to the sessions For want. of
securities.

opersonurt,
lvl indictedob,Nva_st.S'aephia Lee, of No. 8,
)aosftehdouhieit, she lived there for
eight years in the capacity
BlaTchkeHnoexrste-
The house and furniture belonged teoepe! and servant.
called now and then to see how things ' a lady," who
and to receive the money. She
_,.. b were going on,
UM not, however, dis-
close who the lady was.
This person was also consigned to G.l
i tspur-street
Compter to find sureties.
A person of the name of Caroline Train was called,
tut did not answer.
The officer said she was supposed to be on her dying
bed, and therefore could not attend.
The last person called was a defendant of the other
sex—viz., Samuel Elder Friar. The charge was that he
kept the house, No. 13, Black Horse-court.
The officer said that the house in question had been
long open, and it was formerly presided over by a very
young girl, and then bv the defendant's wife, but they
were both dead. Since the demise of his wife the pri-
soner had acted for himself, without any disguise or sub-
terfuge.

The defendant put in some papers to show that he be-
longed in sorn2 way or other to one of the public dis-
pensaries; but they have nothing to do with the present
c arge.
. Alderman COPELAND said he should double the
ount in his case, and call upon him to find two good
ities in the sum of 40/. each, and his own
recognizances in the sum of 801., with twenty-four
hours' notice.

The whole party were then conveyed to the Giltspur
Compter, to await their fates at the ensuing London
sessions, as several of them said they were unable to find
securities.

Mr. William Wadsworth, a farmer residing in Bed-
fordshire, stated that about two years and a half since
he had a horse stolen, and he had lately discovered it in
the possession of Mr. Vines, a respectable druggist, in
Aldersgate, who having purchased it, refused to give it
up, hence he (Mr. Wadsworth) applied to their Worships
for assistance.

Mr. Forster, the marshalman, said he had seen Mr.

are in vain ; there are insuperable bars to my remaining
with your brother, which nothing but a miracle, I be-
lieve, can remove ; and, in addition to these, you are not.
perhaps, aware that Mr. Thornbury has himself placed.
others, in having himself told every one (I may say all
our acquaintances) what has happened. I ask you, as e
woman, could I live with him after this ? And I ask
Mr. Bouchier, as a man, ought he ever to think of it ?
Again I say I will not remain with him. Wen
that miracle I allude to ever to be performed I would
promise to return, and in the meantime I would reside
with my mother ; this, now, is my firm and final deter-
mination, and I would advise both Mr. B. and yourself
to act in the way most adapted to Mr. T.'s benefit without
further reference to me, except as an inducement to
him to amend his conduct. I must not quit this subject
without alluding to my letter to Mr. Bouchier, and the con-
clusions you have wrongly drawn from it ; and I much
fear I shall but ill explain what I mean, but nevertheles:.
I must attempt. I intended to express regret and sor-
row for the past, as a crime towards God, and that if
your brother altered in every respect, I might in time
endeavour to repair the past, but as it is, never ! I may
say to you as a woman what I could not say to your hus-
band—that I never will again live with Mr. Thornbury
so long as the love I feel for another, guilty though it
be, is warm at'my heart's core. I feel that it would be,
as it were, a second breaking of my marriage vow, and 1
dare not promise more than that if he amends and
changes entirely, I will endeavour to perform my part of
the contract. It was I who put the advertisement in the
Times, having felt the importance of Mr. H. Thornbury's
presence in arranging something for his brother. No-
thing has been written to Mr. Seville, because knowing
the total incapacity of the one brother, from his wretched
state of nerves and health, and of the other from his
utter stupidity, I have not urged it, though I fully see
the urgent want there is of a sensible friend. I would
beg to be pardoned for thus addressing you, but I
thought it would be best to let you see at once what my
intentions were. J. A. T."

Ann Stanton—Lives in Ampton-street, Gray's-Inn-
road. Resided there in September, 1838. Mrs. Thornbury
took apartments for her mother, Mrs. Bevil!, from wit=
!less fur three months. Mrs. Thornbury came and lived
two days, when she went away by some coach. Returned
in about seven weeks. Did not know Mr. Tayloe. Never
heard his name mentioned. Two gentlemen occasionally
came, who represented themselves as Mrs. Thornbury's
brothers. Knew Mrs. Thornbury and one of the gentle-
men on one occasion to be in the drawing-room. They
might have been an hour together. Did entertain some
suspicion as to what was going on.
Mr. Edmund, surgeon, remembers being called in on
the Ist of April, 1838, to Mr. Thornbury, who had been
a patient of his for fourteen years, during which he was
strongly addicted to habits of intemperance.. For a long
time there seemed to be.a gradual development of insa-
nity. On April the Ist, 1838, Mr. Thornbury told him
that his wife had run away with his clerk. His words mere
that Janette had run away with Tom. Did not seem to
feel the circumstances as a man of susceptible mind
would have done. Witness had often admonished Mr.
Thornbury to abandon his habits of intoxication, or that,
otherwise the result would either be insanity or paralysis.
On the Bth of April he again saw him, when he appeared
to be labouring under delirium tremens in one of its
worst forms.

His LORDSHIP briefly summed up. He chiefly dwelt
on the point, that if the Jury were satisfied that Mrs
Thornbury committed adultery after leaving her hus-
band's house a second time, the circumstance of his
having received her back after his knowledge of her pre-
vious criminal intercourse, could not be held as render-
ing him liable for her maintenance.

The Jury almost immediately returned a verdict for
;he defendant.