The Sun.
London, England, 1848-08-16 00:00:00

sequence of her misfortune; and when ho had proved
these facts, and the jury took into consideration the
heartless conduct of the defendant, he was convinced
they would feel that it was a case in which the plaintiff
was entitled to toopillerable damages.

Mary Anne Cox, a rather pretty young woman, was
then examined. She deposed as follows :—I am the
daughter of the plaintiff. I know the defendant George
How. lle lives at Milton, near Newport Pagael, in
which town I reside with my mother. I first met the
defendant At a ball at the Saracen's Head, Newport Pag-
nel, and I danced with him. This was seven or eight
years ago, and I did not see him again until the begin-
ning of September, 1846. I was going upon an errand
in the evening, and met the defendant in the street. I
am now 27 years old, and the defendant is about 30.
When I saw him on this occasion he got off his horse,
and came to me, and said he was happy to see me as
he had not seen me so long, and he wished me to meet
him on the following evening, but I rather refused him,
and we parted. He came by my mother's house in
the following evening, and I went out to speak to
him. I did not tell my mother. I made an appoint
went to meet the defendant at the house of a Mrs.
Paybody, in the town, on the following Wednesday
evening, and I and the defendant went out for a walk
together. The defendant professed love for me on
several occasions, and I met him once or twice a week
in the evening, and we used to walk out together, and
for some time he behaved " very gentlemanly." I did
not tell my mother of these meetings, but she knew of
them from other people. The defendant seduced me in
March, 1847. Ile said he would make me his wife.
From this time an intimacy continued until about six
weeks before I was confined. I first discovered that I
was in the family way in the beginning of May, and
when I informed the defendant of it he said he would
have me for a wife and would make me comfortable. A
short time before I was confined I was talking to the de•
fendant about my condition, and he asked me if I could
not " take something," to which I replied, " George, you
surely don't wish me to kill your child?" The defendant
made no other reply than that his pony was waiting and
he must be going, and he rode away. I was confined
with a girl on the 16th of February, 1848, and the child
is still alive. The defendant has never contributed one
farthing to the support of the child. At the time in
question I was living with my mother, and used to per-
form the domestic work in the house.
Cross-examined—l am a dress-maker. I swore the
child to How before the magistrates, but they refused
to make an order upon him. When I was examined
upon that occasion I swore that Mrs. Paybody had
heard the defendant make an offer of marriage, but when
she was examined she contradicted my statement. I
frequently went with the defendant so late as nine
o'clock at night, between August and February, and
sometimes it was very dark when we were out. We ge-
nerally used to walk a little way upfthe London-road.
My mother knew of these walks, and she used to talk
to me about the impropriety of doing so. I swear that
I never had a lover before. I know a Mr. Deacon. He
used to lodge with us many years ago, but since the.
time of the ball. I never let him in at night in my night-
dress. He used to be brought home late at night occa-
sionally from the public-house by the landlord, and
sometimes the landlord's wife used to bring him home.
—(A laugh.) I will swear that I never let him in at
night in my night-dress. I know John Odell—he 'is a
farmer's son. I went with him once to Northampton
fair, and I was out one night ; but I stayed at the
house of an uncle, and (my mother was aware of it. I
know William Nicholl—he is a farmer and dealer; he
never promised me marriage, nor did I ever pull a piece
of paper out of my pocket and ask him to sign it. I
never met him, or walked with him, or permitted him to
take liberties with me. I know Edward Allright; he is
a pig-dealer, and lives near us. I never said that " Ned
must be a fool to kiss and tell;" or that he had been
bragging about me. I know Joseph Haynes, but I
never walked with him either by day or night. I never
walked out with a man named Wykes. My mother
came one night to Mrs. Pay body's house to fetch ma
home, and she went away first and I remained behind.
I know Poole's-lane, but I will swear I was never there
at three o'clock in the morning, and that William Field-
ing did not pass me in the lane at that time. I was never
out from home so late as three in the morning, and I
never went to Mrs. Paybody's and said that my mother
had locked me out. One evening I did stop at Mrs.
Paybody's rather late, and when I got home it was be-
tween eleven and twelve o'clock, and my mother, not
expecting me, had gone to bed and I could not awake
her, and I was obliged to go and sleep at a friend's house,
and the next morning I told Mrs. Paybody what had
occurred. This was the same night that my mother had
been to fetch me from Mrs. Paybody's.
The CHIEF BARON—Who is this Mrs. Paybody? Wit-
ness—She is the wife of a blacksmith in the town.
Cross-examination continued—l asked the defendant
to put it in writing, that he intended to marry me; but
he said he had not got any paper in his pocket, and his
word would do just as well. I asked him three or four
times to put it in writing, but he refused. I am quite
sure that I am not more than twenty-seven years old,
and Pnever walked with any young man before. The
first time I met the defendant, in 1846, we walked about
the town. We did not go into a corn-field. Almost
every market day I used to go to Mrs. Paybody's to
meet the defendant. He was obliged to pass the door
in his way home from market, and he used to put up his
horse and come to see me.

Mr. CHAMBERS—I-Tow long, pray, did this sort of in-
timacy continue? Witness—Five or six months.
Mr. Joyce, a silversmith in Newport Pagnel, deposed
that he had known the plaintiff and her daughter for
twenty years, awl they always bore a respectable cha-
racter, and he never heard any imputations against the
daughter.
One or two other witnesses were then examined, who
also deposed to the respectability of the plaintiff, and
this closed the case on her behalf.

Mr. CHAMBERS then addressed the jury, and he ob-
served that he should be exceedingly sorry to say one
word to add to the distress of the plaintiff ; but he was
afraid that in the result it would be clearly made out
that she had very much to regret in the conduct of her
child. lie then alluded to the form of the action, and
said it was one of such a character that a counsel hardly
knew how to deal with it ; and it was, in his opinion,
much to be regretted that as time had gone on, and the
inconvenience of the present state of the law had be-
come so manifest, the Legislature had not put the matter
upon a proper footing, and established a form of action
by which the party who was really aggrieved might
make a claim for damages. At present the law was
almost unintelligible. In the first place, no action of
this kind could be sustained at all, unless it was made
out that the parties stood in the relative position of
master and servant, and when this was done, feelings
and affections were allowed to enter into the matter.
The jury, however, were now called upo❑ to say what
damage the plaintiff had sustained ; and, when all the
circumstances were considered, he apprehended they
wculd have very little difficulty in coming to a conclusion
that it was of the most trifling description. The young
woman, who had been called, had positively stated that
she had never had any other lover than the defendant.
In the first place he should submit that this was very
unlikely, but he should positively show them that this
unhappy girl—
The CHIEF BARON here interposed, and inquired whe-
ther the Learned Counsel intended to show that the
young woman did not stand in the position of servant?
Mr. CHAMBERS said he could not do that.

The CHIEF BARON—Then any evidence with regard
to her conduct will be immaterial in the present action.
I do not see how you can escape from a verdict for the
present plaintiff.
Mr. CHAMBERS said he must admit that this difficulty
had struck him. The plaintiff, probably, must have a
verdict upon the question of loss of services and ex.
penses.
The CHIEF BARON was of the same opinion; and,
therefore, it would be quite unnecessary to occupy the
public time, and unnecessarily wound the feelings of the
parties without any object. He added, be was sure that
Mr. Chambers would be the last man who would wish
to do so.
Mr. CHAMBERS proceeded—He quite concurred in the
observations of his Lordship, and he should, therefore,
merely address himself to the facts of the case as they
already appeared in. evidence. The Learned Counsel
then proceeded to state that it appeared plain that the
young woman bad thrown herself in the way of the de-
fendant, and her conduct led to a very strong inference
that he was not the only man with whom she had been
intimate. The circumstances showed that she was a
young woman of easy. access. She saw a young man at
a ball, and then meeting him several years afterwards
at night the intimacy was renewed, and she at once con-
sented to meet him, and walked with him night after
night, without the knowledge of her mother, and until
this unfortunate event happened. Her conduct put him
in mind of a verse from an old poet—
" Whene'er ye meet a fool that's fou,
That ye're a maiden, gar him trow,
Seeni nice—but stick to him like glue."
—(Laughter,) And she did stick to him like glue.—
(Laughter.) He could not go anywhere but the glue
was sticking to him.—(A laugh.) Whenever he came
to market she was watching for him, and it was very
evident that she had brought the disgrace upon herself
by her own misconduct and want of caution. Under
such circumstances he was sure the jury would not en-
courage such an action, for if they did there was hardly
a village or a town in the country where young girls
chose to walk out, either with farmers or labourers, in a
moonlight night, that would not furnish plenty of
similar actions at every assizes. If the young woman
had been so modest and virtuous as she pretended to be,
was it likely that she would so soon have yielded to the
persuasions of the defendant, or having done so, that
she would have consented to be a party to the sort of in-
timacy which she admitted to have taken place between
them afterwards? He submitted that there could be no
doubt as to her conduct, and that it was quite plain she
was as willing as the defendant to consent to what had
taken place. It was a misfortune, no doubt, for a
mother to have a loose daughter; but the ques-
tion here was, what damages ought to be given,
and although he did not deny that the de-
fendant had been guilty of a high moral offence,
yet, if the jury believed that the young woman was
equally guilty in the transaction, they would be injuring
the cause of morality if they were to give any more
than nominal damages in such a case, as it would hold
out an inducement to other parties similarly situated to
act in the same manner. In conclusion, he admitted that
the plaintiff must have a verdict, but he called upon the
jury to give her no greater amount of damages than
would pay for the medical attendance and tho actual ex-
penses she had incurred.
The CHIEF BARON in summing up said, that he con-
curred in many of the observations of the Learned
Counsel with regard to the nature of actions of this de-
scription, and he said that if he had to write a panegyric
upon the law this was certainly not the particular part
of it which he should choose as the theme for praise.
No doubt the origin of the law was to give a master
a remedy when he sustained an injury by his servant
being enticed away from biw, or if any one