The Sun.
London, England, 1848-11-14 00:00:00

tt:e wife was subject to ill-treatment, she would
only confide the knowledge of it to a female.
In conclusion, he intreated them not to be led away by
the eloquent and flowery statements of his Learned
Friend in hts opening speech, and to weigh well in their
minds the points he had urged in defence, impressing
upon them the fact that the character and position of the
defendant in society as a medical man would be deter-
mined by the conclusion at which they might arrive.
The Learned JUDGE, in summing up, said the action
was brought to recover cempensation in damages for an
alleged criminal intercourse with the wife of the plaintiff,
and the damages were laid at 1,000/. The defendant de •
nied the admission of the wrong, but there could be no
doubt that he had committed this gross injury to the
plaintiff, and if they concurred in that view of the case,
which it was almost impossible to doubt, the only ques-
tion would be the amount of damages which they
thought the plaintiff was entitled to. They had been told
of the position of the defendant, of his prospects in life,
and that his professional character depended upon their
verdict; but whatever the consequences might be, the
law of England required that justice should be done to
those whose feelings were thus injured and insulted, and
the more aggravated the surrounding circumstances were
under which the act was committed, the greater should
be the damages. Whatever the consequences might
be, the guilty party had brought them upon himself,
and he was compelled to suffer the fate which awaited
him. This case was one of very serious character, and
could the defendant complain of their verdict if it had
the effect of preventing every head of a family, and
every man who loved his wife and his daughter, to al-
low such a man as this to pollute them? a man who had
abused the trust reposed in him as a member
of the medical profession, by having criminal
connection with the wife of another who had
called him in to attend her during her illness?
Certainly not. And it was fortunate for society that
such instances rarely occurred in a court of justice. The
Learned Judge then directed them to consider their
verdict,

The jury retired, and, after a brief absence, returned
into court with averdict for the plaintiff —Damages, 8001.

EXCHEQUER CHAMBER.
(THIS DAY.)
The Judges sat in the Exchequer Chamber this morn-
ing, and appointed Sittings in Error to be held on the
following days:—
QUEEN'S BENCH, Nov. 27, 28, and 29; and, if ne-
cessary, on Dec. 4 and 5.
COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 30.
EXCHEQUER, Dec. 1 and 2.

RING V. DUNN.

Mr. Baron PARKE said that all the points in this case
were disposed of except one, upon which the Court enter-
tained some little doubt. The question was whether, in
a conviction for perjury, it was competent for the Court
to impose, as part of the sentence, the obligation to give
security for good behaviour and for keeping the peace,
end to order imprisonment until that security was
given. The Court would have entertained no doubt
on this point if they bad been enabled to have access to
the Journals of the House of Lords; but, having now
consulted them, they found that the judges had delivered
an unanimous opinion that it was competent for the
court in all cases of misdemeanour to pass such a sen-
tence. The judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench in
this case must, therefore, be affirmed.
Judgment affirmed accordingly.

MARLBRO' STREET—(THIS DAY.)
A well-dressed middle-aged gentleman, who gave the
assumed name of John Smith, was charged before Mr.
Bingham with having been drunk and riotous in Regent-
street.

The police-constable proved seeing the defendant in
Regent-street in a state of intoxication and very riotous,
and as he appeared to be incapable of taking care of
himself, the constable very properly took care of him
by taking him to the station. As there was no violence
or resistance used, Mr. Bingham was about to discharge
the defendant, when the latter interrupted the worthy
Magistrate, and said, " I deny being either in liquor or
riotous. The fact is, I was walking down Regent-
street, when the constable came up, and told
me to move on and not make a disturbance.
I certainly remonstrated with him for interfer-
ing with me, when he collared me and took me
to the station, where I was treated very insolently and
put into a dark hole. I refused to enter such a place,
when I was roughly told that the cell had once been
occupied by the Marquis of Waterford, and, therefore,
was quite good enough for my reception."
Mr. BINGHAM—A s you choose to dispute the con-
stable's testimony, I shall put you back until the inspec-
tor arrives, who, no doubt, will be able to prove whether
you really were in liquor or not.
Inspector Plume shortly after came into court, and,
in answer to the magistrate, said that the defendant was

not only very drunk but very obstinate.
Upon hearing this Mr. BINGHAM fined defendant 55.,
and told him it he had not disputed the charge of drunk-
enness he should have discharged him.