The Sun.
London, England, 1847-06-01 00:00:00

NARY CASE.

II V. THOMPSON.

Sir F. Tustsicik.R said he had been instructed to apply
for a rule calling upon a person, whom he would presently
mention, to show cause why a criminal information should
not be filed against him. He had to make the application
under circumstances of the most extraordinary, painful, and
distressing nature. The necessary details were so painful
and disgusting, and would be so disagreeable to the feelings
of the parties who would be affected by them, that he
trusted he might be permitted, as far as possible, to spare
their feelings, by making no mention of any name which was
not absolutely necessary for the purpose of the application.
The person on whose behalf he applied was a young man—
an heir to a title—who on coming of age in 1842,
inherited considerable possessions. He became acquainted
at Cambridge with the gentleman against whom the appli-
cation was made, a Mr. James Thompson, who was a fellow-
commoner there, and although not in the same college, great
intimacy had sprung up between them. In the month of
August, 1845, the complainant married his present
wife, who was the principal subject in this most
painful application. She was a young lady only seven-
teen years of age. She was educated in France. Per-
haps there was not that restraint in her manners
which resulted from an English education, she was of an
open, unsuspicious disposition, but lady-like in her manner,
and correct in her behaviour. In the course of last year the
complainant was induced to invite Mr. Thompson to
visit him at his estate in Wales, and he arrived there
on the 15th of July. At that time he was almost a
stranger to the lady, although she had seen him a
short time before her marriage. There was a mutual
friend of Mr. Thompson and the plaintiff, Count
Cannanas, who resided in Belgium, and wbo was invited to
join Mr. Thompson in this visit. In consequence of this in-
vitation the Count arrived on the 18th of August. A very
few days after his arrival, Mr. Thompson began to excite
suspicions by hinting at certain familiarities which he said
had taken place between him and Mrs. H. This excited the
curiosity of the Count, and he was induced to put some ques-
tions to him on the subject. He appeared unwilling at first
to give any answer, but had stated on more than one occasion
that a criminal intercourse had taken place between him
and the lady of the complainant. It was very important to
a proper view of the case that the dates should be correctly
given. Mr. Thompson arrived on the 15th July, almost a
stranger to the lady, and the Count met him at the house of
the complainant on the 18th of August, and prior to the ar-
rival of the Count many of those circumstances which were
related to him by the defendant were alleged to have taken
place. Having established in the mind of the
Count a perfect conviction of the sincerity and truth
of his statement, he proceeded to act a part cal-
culated to rivet those suspicions in his mind.
[The Learned Counsel then proceeded to state several cir-
cumstances which went to show that the defendant had
frequently boasted of his intrigues with the lady in question,
and had followed her on various occasions, and conducted
himself purposely in such a manner as to give a colour to
his boastings.] His conduct became so extremely disagree-
able, and he had acted so rudely, that the lady complained to
her husband ofhis conduct. Her husband, who was ill in bed,
desired her to request Mr. Thompson to leave the house,
which she accordingly did on the 10th October. At the time
that the Count and Mr. Thompson left the house, the hus-
band and his wife were utterly ignorant of the atrocious and
false statements which had been made. It was not until the
18th February, when a communication was made to the
uncle of the complainant, that the complainant be-
came aware of the statements made by Mr. Thompson.
The complainant had been in correspondence with
the Count after he left his house, and his letters
were so mysterious in tote and terms that they excited some
suspicion in the mind of the complainant, and understanding
that the Count had several of Mr. Thompson's letters in his
possession, he thought it of essential importance to obtain
possession of them, or, at all events, a knowledge of their
contents, and he sent to Brussels, in the month of
March, for this purpose. The Count delivered up,
on the 30th of April last, several letters which
were translated from the French, the language in which
they were written. (Sir F. Thesiger then read several letters,
in which the defendant re➢eated the assertions as to the
infidelity of the lady which he had before made. All
the letters were written in an incoherent strain ; and he re-
peatedly asked in them the nature of the evidence which
the Count would be inclined to give, if the case came before
a legal tribunal.) Now (proceeded the Learned Cbunsel),
those letters I think will be sufficient to show that lam
entitled to the rule for which I have moved. Of course it
was necessary to communicate all those disgusting particulars.
The Learned Gentleman then proceeded to state that Mr.
Thompson had accused the lady of intriguing with a Rev.
Mr. Smith. He had an affidavit from that gentleman dis-
tinctly denying the accusation, and also an affidavit from the
lady herself, declaring that all the statements made by
Thompson regarding her were false.
Rule granted.

BANKRUPTCY.—(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Commissioner GOULBURN. )
IN RE DIATTHEWMAN.
This insolvent, who was described as of Coleford, Glouces-
tershire, coal-mine proprietor, was brought up to be dis-
charged from custody.
His HONOUR, on looking at the schedule, said this was a
very unusual case. The debts were stated at 10,7001., and
property unencumbered 30,7001.
Mr. DUNCAN said the principal property was a coal-mine,
called the Oaken and Churchway Colliery, in the Forest of
Dean.

His HoNowt asked whether there was any opposition.
A SOLICITOR replied that there could be no objection to the
insolvent's being discharged out of custody, but the question
was, what could be done with the property?
Mr. DUNCAN said that the insolvent proposed to pay his
debts in two years if the mine was worked under his direction,
or it could be leased for 2,0001. a year at the least.
His HONOUR said that in this case it was very requisite
that a trade assignee should be appointed, and in order to
give all the creditors an opportunity of considering the
matter, an intermediate meeting ought to be held, and notice
should be given in the Gazette.

➢lr. DuwcAN said there was a great difference of opinion as
to the mode in which the mine ought to be worked. If the in-
solvent was allowed to work it in his own way, it would,
beyond doubt, realise at least what had been stated.
His Horrourt said, that perhaps it would be well to hear
the insolvent's views on the subject before any proceeding.
were adopted, as the case was one quite out of the common
course, and if there were grounds of opposition it would not
be prudent to have the petition dismissed.
The case was then adjourned, for the choice of an assignee,
to the 12th of June at two o'clock.

BOROUGH COURT.-(THIS DAY.)
(Before George Crivz, Esq., Judge.)
ArronxicTs IN THE NEW COURTS.
This morning, just before the Learned Judge of the Court
was about to commence the business of the day, Mr. Francis
Herbert, an attorney of Staples Inn, made the subjoined ap-
plication to the Court, in reference to the costume of attor-
neys and solicitors, under the new Act of Parliament. Ihe
Learned Gentleman stated that the Act being new under
which the proceedings of the new County Courts were di-
rected, at the suggestion of several professional gentlemen,
he wished to put a question to the Judge, as to whether he
would prefer attorneys and solicitors appearing in an ordinary
costume, or in their professional robes. He understood that
at some of the new County Courts, attorneys appeared in
gowns, and in others without; and that being the case,
he merely wished to ascertain what rule he (the judge of the
Southwark Court) had laid down in the matter. He (Mr.
F. Herbert) appeared to conduct the case of the plaintiff in
the cause of Skeen v. Styles, and considering he ought to
appear in professional robes, he had that morning applied to
a robe maker's in Chancery-lane for a gown, but he was in-
formed that in consequence of the passing of the new Act, so
great a demand had been made for attorneys' robes, that_he
could not be accommodated.
The Learned JUDGE, in reply, stated that he wished as far
as possible to follow the practice of the superior courts of law ;
attorneys, however, might appear to conduct cases in what-
ever costume they thought proper, therefore at present he
would not lay down any rule in the matter, but leave it to
the preference or discretion of the parties concerned.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.
(.
The June General STHlSessions DAY
the)
for county of Middlesex
commenced this morning, before the Assistant-Judge and a
full bench of Magistrates, at the Court-house, Clerkenwell-
green.
The number of prisoners for trial was 88, nine of whom
were misdemeanants, the remainder being charged with
felony. The following is an analysis of the educational con-
dition of the prisoners, which, unfortunately, at this great
metropolitan Court seems to be as low as it could possibly be
in the most neglected of the rural districts. Of the 88 pri-
soners for trial 35 could neither read nor write; 51 could
read and write imperfectly ; while only 2 were described as
able to read and write well.
The Learned ASSISTANT-JUDO)I briefly charged the grand

jury with respect to the nature of the duties they had to dis-
charge, after which they retired.
Joseph Squires, a fashionably-dressed young man, in-
dicted tor stealing a pocket-book from the person of Captain
Mervin Archdall, M.P., was found Guilty.—Sentence was
deferred, in order that inquiries might be made about him.
11Iary Anne Brown pleaded Guilty to an indictment charg-
' ings her with stealing some drugget and other articles, the
property of John Rosier. Sentence, three months' imprison-
ment with hard labour.

John Evans pleaded Guilty to stealing a quantity of straw-
work from the premises of Henry Richards, and was sentenced
to four months' imprisonment and hard labour.
Mary Ann Ccilam was found Guilty of stealing a quantity
of wearing apparel, the property of Henry William Bailey.—
She was sentenced to four months' imprisonment with hard
labour.

MARLBRO'-STREET-(THIS DAY.)
THE EXTENSIVE ROBBERY AT CHRISTIE'S HOTEL.—
John Heywood, a respectably-dressed man, late a waiter at
Christie's Hotel, St. James's-street, was placed before Mr.
Bingham, charged with stealing a writing-case, containing
1101 in Bank of England notes, 250/. i❑ circular notes, a
letter of credit for 3001., sixteen sovereigns, a gold watch,
and various other articles, the property of General Sir
Alexander Mackenzie, Bart.
The prosecutor stated that he was staying at Christie's
Hotel, St. James's-street. The prisoner was one of the
waiters there, and had frequent access to prosecutor's apart-
ments. On Thursday night last, previous to his going to his
bed-room, about twelve o'clock, he left on a table in his
sitting-room a leather writing-case, containing 1181. in Bank
notes, 181. in sovereigns, 250/. in Coutts's circular notes, of
251. each, a letter of credit on a banker at Frankfort for
3001., a gold watch, and various other articles. On enter-
ing the sitting-room the next morning he immediately dis-
covered that his writing-case was not in its usual place, and
that it was missing. He rang the bell for the servants and
informed them of the circumstance, but they all denied
having seen it.
Temfield, the general's valet, proved seeing the writing-
case safe in its accustomed place at half-past eight on Friday
morning. On being informed by the general of its dis-
appearance, he proceeded to the station and gave informa-
tion to the police,
John Haynes, inspector of the detective force, said, on the
evening of Friday last he was sent for to investigate a rob-
bery at Christie's Hotel. On proceeding there he found that
a writing-case, containing the articles named by the pro-
secutor, had been stolen from his (the prosecutor's) room.
He examined the various servants, and among others the
prisoner, who he was informed was in the habit of attending
upon the general. He continued his inquiry up to yesterday
afternoon, when a circumstance transpired which induced
him to go to No. 8, Hand-court, Holborn. He there re-
ceived from the landlady's daughter the black leather bag
produced, containing the whole of the general's property,
with the exception of a 5/. note and a couple of sovereigns.
Witness then returned to Christie's Hotel, and previous to
taking the prisoner into custcdy, questioned him as to whether
he ever had a bag of the same description as the one produced,
and whethor he ever lodged at No. 8, Hand-court, Holborn.
The prisoner replied that he never had a bag at all like
the one produced by witness, and denied all knowledge of
such a place as Hand-court. Witness then took him into
custody, and on searching his pockets found the key belong-
ing to the bag
Elizabeth Smith said she resided with her mother, who
keeps a coffee-house, No. 8, Hand-court. The prisoner and
a friend took lodgings at her mother's house about a month
ago. He occupied a room on the second floor. The bag pro-
duced by last witness was brought by the prisoner, who de-
livered it to her care on Friday night last.
The prisoner, who declined to say anything in defence, was
fully committed to take his trial at the ensuing sessions to be
holden at the Old Bailey.