The Sun.
London, England, 1848-05-16 00:00:00

f-ea""
LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF QUEEIV9-BENCH, May 15.
(Sittings in Banco.)
BAKE•
This was an action of seduction. The plaintiff
ens a toll-keeper. The young woman assisted him
in that business until after she beeame pregnant, when
abe resolved not to let her condition be known to her
father, and she left his house under the pretence of
getting a situation, but in reality she want to Exeter
And afterwards to Exmouth, and was kept part of the
time by the defendant. She was afterwards aban-
doned by him, and reduced to the greatest distress ;
eras left entirely without assistance, and must have
:starved, but that she at length wrote home, and her
mother went to the place where she was and took her
sway, but not to the father's house, but to a neigh-
bour's cottage, and there she was confined, and her
father paid the expenses of her confinement and
maintained her and the child. The present
action was then brought. The cause was
tried before Lord Chief Justice Wilde, in
the summer assizes of 1847, when these facts
having been proved, his Lordship said that the daugh-
ter went away voluntarily, and so put an end to the
?elation of master and servant ; that she was brought
'ack, and not put in her father's house, but in that
of another person ;• so that it must be taken that the
relation of master and servant was put an end to by
mutual consent, and, consequently, there must be a
arsuit. A rule had since been obtained to set aside
ibis nonsuit and have a new trial.
Mr. Crowder and Mr. Holdsworth showed cause
against the rule, and contended that no loss of ser-
vice, as a consequence of the seduction, was shown ;
that the case was nothing more than that of a servant
choosing to quit her place, and that as she left of her
own accord, and while she was able to perform all
the duties she had ever rendered to her father, the de-
fendant could not be charged with having occasioned
loss of service ; and, consequently, the father had
not suffered such an injury as enabled him so to
inaintain.an action.
Mr. Sergeant Kinglake (with whom was Mr.
Greenwood) in support of the rule was stopped.
Lord Deivatax said that it was unnecessary to hear
the plaintiff's counsel. There was no doubt as to
the general law, but the question here was whether
the facts of the case fell within its operation. Both sides
*greed that there must be a loss of service in order to
found a right of action. The only question raised
here was whether there had been a loss of service
truly attributable to the seduction. The Court
thought that there had. It was true that the young
woman went away voluntarily from her father's
house, and that no physical inability to perform her
ordinary services occasioned him the loss of them.
But he lost them in consequence of her having been
seduced ; for but for that seduction she would not
have left her father's house, but would have continued
to render him her accustomed services. The Ceurt
was therefore of opinion that there was some evidence
of the kind required, and that evidence ought to have
been left to the jury. The rule for a new trial must,
therefore, be absolute.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-110 USE.
A lad who appeared to be overwhelmed with grief,
was charged with having attempted to destroy him-
self in the Thames.
It was proved that the prisoner requested a man
-who was lying along on a seat in one of the recesses
of London-bridge, to move a little, and than mounted
the parapet, and after striking his breastlwo or three
times, apparently in great mental agony, precipitate
himself into the water. If it had not been for W.
rockwell, a waterman, who was passing in his boat
at the time under the bridge, the unfortunate lad,
who was not more than fifteen years of age, must
lame been drowned.
The prisoner, who was deeply affected, said he
sincerely repented the offence of which he had been
guilty, and declared that nothing should ever induce
him to make an attempt of the kind again.
The sympathies of all present were strongly ex-
cited by the brief history of the poor boy. He had
been for some time in the employment of a respect-
able working-jeweller, who had a very high opinion
of his integrity, shrewdness, and talent, but his mother
was cursed with the love of the gin-bottle. She had,
however, never disgraced him by calling at his em-
ployer's house until the day on which he afterwards
plunged into the river, and then she made her appear-
ance in a st ate of intoxication and with a very much
disfigured face at the place in which he was perform-
ing his duty. He went home at dinner time, and
found her in the same dreadful condition. He could
mot eitt a morsel, and full of apprehensions that her
vice would not only increase, but that his employer
would suspect he might be induced to act dishonestly
by one who had shown so bad an example and throw
him upon the world, he was mad enough to deter-
mine to put an end to himself.
The boy's master said he placed unbounded confi-
dence in the prisoner, and was convinced that he was
proof against the authority of a bad example even in
tie conduct of a parent.
The father of the prisoner confirmed the account
given by the employer.
The mother, too, was present. Her appearance
bore testimony to her alleged habits, but she said
nothing. She, however, looked as if she was shed-
ding tears. The boy was handed over to his bene-
volent master.