The Sun.
London, England, 1841-12-03 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

VICE CIIAIVCELLORS' COURT, Dec. 2.
(Before Vice-Chancellor DavcE.)
HOWELL V. TYLER.
This was a suit instituted by the plaintiffs as legatees
against the executors of the legator.
The bill prayed an account of what was due to the
plaintiffs for principal and- interest in respect
of a legacy of 3001., and that that amount
might be decreed to he paid to the plaintiffs, according
to their respective interests, out of the personal estate of
the executor and heir-at-law, or, in case of deficiency,
the amount to be raised by mortgage.
His HONOUR decreed the ordinary account applicable to
the personal estate of the debtor of a legacy.
The Cotner rose at a quarter past four o'clock.
(Before Vice-Chancellor WIGRAM.)
LITTLE V. GREVILLE.
In this case the bill was filed for the purpose of com-
pelling the defendants to pay into Ootrt the sum of
6,0001, of which they had become possessed in the
character of trustees, under the will of the testator, Mr.
Priest. -
The arguments, not being concluded at the rising of
the Court, are to be resumed to-morrow.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Dec. 1.

CRIM. CON —ORFEUR V. WATKINS.
Mr. KELLY (in continuation from our Afternoon
Edition of yesterday) said—He would pass over the fami-
liarities which would be pikwed more directly in evi-
dence, and which would leave no doubt on the minds of
the Jury that the criminal intercourse had taken place
betwen the parties. The only remaining question was
the amount of damages. If it was shown that the plain-
tiff ill-treated his wife, 'that he had left ;her short of
money, or had ever left her, unless when compelled by
his duty, that would, of course, lessen their amount ; but
if that could not be shown, then he would leave it to the
Jury to say what damages that man should pay who had
inflicted so deep a wrong upon the plaintiff. They should
also take into account that the plaintiff would now have
to bring up these children himself, they being deprived
of the Countenance and support of their mother. He
would now leave the case in their hands, and he was sa-
tisfied that they would give such damages as the plaintiff
was entitled to under these distressing circumstances.
The following witnesses were then examined :--
Frederick Charles Fordyce produced an examined copy
of the registry of the marriage of the plaintiff with Hester
Richards, 27th March, 1825.
Jane Robson Kidner—l am the wife of W. Kidner, a
butcher, living near Bermondsey. I know the plaintiff,
who is master of a vessel. I was present at the marriage.
Her father was a ship-chandler, and she was about 18 at
the time. Captain Orfeur was from 25 to 27. I visited
them after their marriage, and they appeared to be very
happy and comfortable.
Cross-examined by Mr. THEsmEn-=They were living
at East-lane, Bermondsey. I have not been more than
twice in their house for the last five years, but I have
seen her twice at my house with her husband also in
that times I saw them more frequently before that
time. I never saw the defendant Watkins at their house.
Agnes Westcoe— I was present at the marriage of
plaintiff and his wife, and have been in the habit of
visiting there. I thought they lived very happily to-
gether. I saw Mrs. Orfeur last in the month of July.
I live in Union-street, Borough. I have been four or
five times in the course of a year there. I have some-
times seen Mr. Orfeur at home.
Eliza Ellis—l live at Covington-terrace, Bermondsey.
I know the family of Mrs. ()deur. I have known Mrs.
Orfeur since she was a child. They lived near me. My
father was in the sea service. The plaintiff has seven
children alive—the eldest 16, and the youngest two
years old. I have been very frequently at the house,
and they always appeared to live very happily together.
Mr. Orfeur was often absent for months at a time at sea.
Mrs. Orfeur's father died about four years ago, but
previously to that time Captain and Mrs. Orleur lived as
part of their family. I know -William Watkins the de-
fendant. He is a pilot, and has two steam-tugs—the
Mara and the Fiddler. His father also owns some ves-
sels. Have often seen the defendant at Mrs. Orfeur's
when the plaintiff was absent. To a stranger he would
appear to be her master. I have seen him pull her on
ius knee, kiss her, and put his arms round her neck fre-
queetly. I have seen the defendant and Mrs. Orfeur
on the sofa together. They were lying down. At
another time she appeared to be lying in the defendant's
arms on the sofa. I saw either him er her pull down her
clothes, which were up nearly to her knee. That
occurred about three weeks after last Christmas—the
other familiarities I. have seen before and since Christ-
mas. I have seen the defendant there as early as seven
in the morning. He was then washing himself. I
helped to make the bed that day, and remarked that it
looked as if two persons had slept in it. I thought so
at the time. I saw William (the defendant) get over
the garden wall about eleven at night coming into
Mrs. Orfeur's premises. I have often seen them
walking and sitting in the rope-walk behind the
house. He generally had one arm round her waist and
the other in her bosom. She sometimes used to sit
upon his knee. His mother used frequently to
come for him and he used to hide from her.
I have known defendant remain till eleven or twelve
at night, when Mr. Orfeur was away. I have known
him throw things at the. window at night, and she used
to open the window. On one occasion she came down
stairs, and let him in. She had been in bed, and had a
shawl on over her night dress. I went in one morning,
at nine, to Mrs. t )reeur's bed-room, to fetch the youngest
child away, and William was in her bed-room. I heard
him, last summer, ask Mrs. Orfeur when she meant to
be up, and she said she did not know. He said, " I hope
you will, before Old Harry (the plaintiff) comes home."
They did not think I was near them at the time, and
were confused when they saw me. I have seen him fre-
quently come to supper, and they always supped by
themselves in the best parlour.
Cross-examined by Mr. THESIGER—My houk is
very close to Mr. Orfeur's. I have been lately living on
some property of my mother's. I have known William
since we were children together. lam twenty-one, and
I think he is about two years older. It is about three
years since I saw him first at Mrs. Orfeur's. I never saw
any familiarities till Capt. at_
went his last voyage.
There was a female servant in the house the time I saw
them lying on the sofa. I said nothing when I came into
the room on that occasion. I should say I have seen them
kissing and sitting on his knee 15 or 20 times. I once
said to Mrs. Orfeur, that if Captain Orfeur came home
he would not like it. There was a glass door to the
room where the sofa is, and anybody looking in could
see what was going on. I saw something thrown up
at the windows front my own door. It was then eleven
it nig•ht. I was at the time living at No. 25. When
I spoke to Mrs. Orleur she said it was no business of
Captain Orfeur's, or mine either. When I saw them
,n the sofa it was after Christmas, and about seven in
the evening. There was no candle in the room, but a
tire. He never told me that the steam-tugs were his
i'ather's, but he made them over to him lately. I was
.old so. I knew William Morgan. I have met hint at
Ars. Orfeur's twice. I saw John Baker there at two
parties. Mrs. Orleur's mother was married again to a
Mr. Batehelor, about two years ago.
Susan Matthews—l was servant in the house of de-
iondant's father. I went os the 20th of May, 1840, and
remained a year. The defendant lived with his father
during that time. I have frequently seen Mrs. Orient.
at Mr. Watkins's house. I saw them together on one
occasion when the family were gone out. She asked
ter the defendant, and walked into the back parlour,
where he was. She sat on his knee by the fire, his arm
round her waist, and her arm round his neck. At
another time" saw her sitting on Mr. William's knee.
iler clothes were above her knees and his hand was under
her clothes. That was in the back parlour. On a Sun-
,lay afternoon they were in the back parlour together fur
oitte time, and the door shut.
Pearse.—l ant 16 years old. I was servant to
Mrs. Meur for seven or eight months. I went there
in the mai of Dceember last. Captain Orfeur was then
tway. Mr. William Watkins was there almost every
!venous,. He stopped as hour or an hour and a half.
Saw them at one time, Mrs. Orfeur sitting on his knee,
ind his arm round her waist.
Mark I favy-1 am a (airman. I lived in the Rope-
;Timed behind Mr. Orfeur's house. I have seen Mrs.
>rfeur and the defendant in the rope-ground at eleven,
iall-past eleven, and at all hours. Ile sometimes had
tis arm round her waist, and sometimes round her neck.
I lannah Everett—l live iuWaser-laue, Dock head, II i ved
Ls servant with Mrs. Orfeur for four months . before
tetsy Pearce. I saw William Watkins there almost
very day. I saw them walking together in the rope-
;round late at night. I saw theta together in
he back parlour, Mrs. Orfeur sitting on his
knee. I went into Mrs. Orfeur's bed-room,
C morning, about a fortnight before lien. I saw
Watkins lying in the bed with Mrs. Orfeur. Ills back
,its towards me, but I knew him very well. Mrs. Or-
teur told the never to answer the bell at night. It used
to be rung ta o or three times a week. Ido not know
(")11-1 foe uansweredhe
I
slvertos.
)1.1.
actl),,reer. •
Elizabeth Orfeu I
plaintiff'sr braomthethe
r. neYPofa C-iaaprtlanionu t I John
Orfeur with about loot during my bro-
ther's have been often at plaintiff's house,
ictaeadant there.
George Reed—
from St. Katherine'sl took the brig Leda
l Captain)no ak pilot.
theOrfeur Downs on the 22d of
November, 1840.
and went on his voyage then came on board,
Constantinople Lin and Syria.
The defendant came as far as a
biehouse-reach. lie is
inl
le, .1 kip. t ipsisd,t ,
as 1811.
sa .1
propertye
tte a
m
a waterman, and as=isted with
went
the
a a
ati theit e voyagedgeah enh• with
Captain Robert Bulletn—Deposed that he°
aitztedglsettruarrneodf
made in Cl3pltra.inLoOcrkf,eutrh,e
steam-
tuns Monarch and Fiddler, were
of William Watkins. A new Registry w„
Oc-
tober,- 1841.
TIIESIGER then addressed the Jury for the de-
fendant. lle said it was no part of his duty or his in-
clination to treat the plaintiff's claim with levity. The
principal witness in the case was Miss Ellis, who ap-
peared to treat the matter with rnuch unconcern, but he
did not mean to say that the injury of which the i
plan-
tiff complained was not a very serious one indeed.
could feel for his sufferings and privations, and for
his situation, in being deprived of ii protectress for his
children ; but he called upon the Jury to weigh
a m weigh the
.cs.
whole circumstances of the case, which gav
charac-
ter he never recollected before to have I!'tnte
trusted he would satisfy the Jury that whatever sed
the
iu-
-1 t
jury might be that the plaintiff had sustained personally,
what be had lost was of a very trifling and valueless
na-
ture. The parties had been married for 16 years, and
had a family of seven or eight children, and the de-
fendant was, at the time these transactions were said to
have taken place, not more than 22 years of age. These
were circumstances of a very peculiar character, and de-
served their serious consideration. Another point to which
he would refer the Jury was that there had been no
evidence given as to the station in life or property of the
defendant. If the wife had been a virtuous character it
was impossible, from her age and character, that the de