The Sun.
London, England, 1851-02-28 00:00:00

FEBRUARY 28, 1851.

Willi am 11.nlfe Hay and Ab-ah tm Surridge, pro-
prietors of u van running between L,ndon end 'AA,
in Essex, were charged on informa:don with c:irrying
passeng.ers for hire without licence.
It mppen'ed that on the 15th of November and 131 h
of ll,ce nber two officers were conveyed by the van
from London to Brentford, at a speed greater than
four miles per hour, and for which accommodation
they were charged separate fares.
Mr. SMITH, a solicitor, on the part of the defend-
ants, pleaded guilty, but said that this practice was
entirely the act of ther servant, without either their
knowledge or consent.
Dr. Bateman said that the coaches on the same line
of road, wi'h the licence and mileage, paid to the
amount of 1501 pr annum ; but these parties were
doing the s4lll. thing wah..ut any payment whatever.
,Mr Commissioner HkItItI3ON said if the defendants
gave up the practice they should impose a smaller floe
than they should if it was continued after this; for
those persons who paid fur licences and mileage must
be protected.
Tne defendants were then fined in the sum of 101

Henry Schulz, of George-street, Spitalfields, was
charged with having in his possession an illicit still,
and wi:h working the same.
It appeared th Lt the officers went to a place for-
merly occupied as a sugar-house, to which they
obtained access with considerable difficulty, and in a
brick building in the lower part of the premises, ap-
proached by an iron door, they found a still at work,
with a quantity of spirits and apparatus for carrying
on a very extensive trade. They seiz?d the whole of
the stock in trade, which filled two vans, and amongst
the articles seized was an iron pan, nearly a ton in
weight.

The COURT gave judgment in the penalty of 2001
and condemned th 6 seizure.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
HOME Cllt CUIT. Hertford. Feb. 27.

CIVIL SlDE.—(Before Lord Chief Justice CAMP
BELL and a Common Jury.)
SEDUCTION.—PAGE V. REST.

This was an action brought by Robert Welford
Page against Isaac Rest to recover deranges for the
loss of the services of his daughter Ruth Page, in
consequence of ner seduction by the defendant.
Mr. M. Chambers and Mr. Hawkins were for the
plaintiff, and Mr. E. James appeared for the defendant.
Mr. CHAMBERS, in opening the case, said that it

was one of a very distressing character, the plaintiff
being compelled to come before a jury and ask at
their hands compensation from the defendant for the
injury he had inflicted upon him by seducing his
daughter. The parties filled a respectable position in
the town of Ware, the plaintiff being a brewer, and
also keeping a beer-shop; and the defendant was
connected with a fa'adv carrying on a respectable and
extensive bu-iness a r,zrocers. The parties were both
very young, neither IF them being at the present time
more than twenty-one years old, and there had been
an intimacy between them for nearly six years. At
first that intimacy was of the ordinary kind ; but
about two years ago the defendant succeeded in se-
ducing the daughter of the plaintiff, and the result of
their intimacy was the birth of a child in the course
of the last year. Immediately upon the condition of
the unfortunate young woman becoming known to
her family she was obliged to leave her father's roof,
and she had ever since been compelled to take shelter
with other members of her family. The plaintiff
consequently had suffered most deeply from the de-
gradation his family had sustained through the mis-
conduct of the defendant, and it was under these
circumstances that he was now compelled to seek
that remedy which the law afforded for such ass injury.
Ruth Page was then called as a witness. She de-
posed that she was the daughter of the plaintiff. Her
father lives at Ware, where be carried on the busi-
ness of a brewer. The defendant lived with his
brother, who was a grocer, next door to her father.
She first became intimate with the defendant about
six years ago, but three years back their intimacy
was of a closer description, and at that period she was
very frequently in the company of the defendant, and
considered him as an honourable suitor, although
he never made her any offer of marriage. Io February
1850, she was delivered of a child. The defendant
was the father of that child. The defendant had left
Ware in May or June, 1849, to go to another situa-
don at Malden, and in July following she discovered
that she was in the family way. When her father
became acquainted with her situation she was com
pelled to leave her home, and she had never been
there since, but had stopped with her sisters, at Hod-
desdon and prentford. After the child was born pro-
ceedings were taken before a magistrate who made an
order upon the defendant for its support.
By Mr. James.—She first knew the defendant
six years ago. She believed he was an apprentice at
the time. The defendant was about her own age,
and she was now 21. They used to meet in the
yard at the back of their house. Some correspond.
ence had passed between them, and she believed that
she wrote the first letter to the defendant. He was
never introduced to her father or any of her friends
as her suitor. The criminal intimacy first com-
menced about two years before the child was born.
Tne intimacy constantly took place in the churchyard
which was at the back of the house where they lived.
They used to go out and meet and then repair to the
churchyard. The defendant did not promise her
marriage on any occasion. She did not know pre-
cisely- what his position was, or that after he was out
of his time he was engaged as journeyman to his
brother at a salary of 251. a year. She was not awire
that her mother was averse to this action hi ig
brought. She bad never told her father of the
defendant paying her any particular attention. She
believed the defendant was at the present time a
journeyman to a grocer at Malden.
Some witnesses were then examined to prove the
expenses connected with the birth of the child ; and
Mr. Butcher, the medical gentleman, who was in the
habit of attending upon the plaintiff's family, stated
that when he became aware of the condition of his
daughter, plaintiff was dreadfully distressed, and his
mind so much affected that at one time it was appre-
hended that he would destroy himself.
This closed the case for the plaintiff.
Mr. JAMES then addressed the jury for the defen-
dant. He observed that when a father came into
court to ask a jury for damages for the injury he had
suffered from a seducer, the case was one which na-
turally created a very great deal of prejudice, but
when the jury considered all the circumstances of the
present ca‘e, he felt assured they would see that
there was an entire absence of every one of those
aggravating circumstances which were but too fre-
quently found in cases of this description ; and it cer-
tainly did appear to him that the plaintiff would
much better have consulted the interest of his family,
and that of the unfortunate girl who had that day
appeared before them as a witness, if he had refrained
from bringing the present action, and thereby exposed
her shame to the world. The Learned Counsel then
proceeded to urge that it was absurd, under the cir
nurnstances that had been d- posed to, to say that the
defendant had been guilty of seduction there was no
seduction at all in the case, or, if there was, both
parties were equally guilty. The young woman who
had been called had given her evidence most fairly
and truthfully; and it was perfectly clear that the
parties, who were really only a boy and a girl, being
there together, had both given way to their passions,
and bad acted most improperly; but they were both
evidently equally to blame. This being the case, the
plaintiff was undoubtedly by the law entitled to reco-
ver any expense that might have been entailed upon
him as the result of the defendant's conduct, but he
submitted that this was all that ought to be given to
him, and that it would be most unjust towards the
defendant to compel him to pay more than nominal
damages in addition to that expense.
The LORD Career JUSTICE having briefly summed
up, the jury, after a short deliberation, returned a
verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 60/.
The cases tried in the Crown Court were utterly
devoid of interest.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-HO USE.
Yesterday the LORD MAYOR stated, for the infor-
mation of those humane persons who bad contributed
to the relief of Sarah Bonney (by mistake called
Baring), and her husband and children, that he had
made inquiry into this distressing case. His Lord-
ship considered it necessary to mention, in the first
place, that he had ascertained beyond a doubt that no
blame whatever was attributable to the Bermondsey
relieving officers; and he felt the greatest anxiety to
remove the impression which Sarah Bonny's accusa-
tion of them was calculated to make, and to exonerate
them from all blame. With respect to the unfortu •
nate family, their destitution had been, until
the circumstances were represented at the
Mansion House, complete; but he had received
for their relief Numerous contributions which it was
his intention to appropriate to their service in such a
manner as would be likely to be permanently benefi-
cial to them. The husband had been removed to the
hospital, and would be enabled by the public benevo-
lence, upon his discharge, to set up in a limited way
as a butcher, to which trade he had served
his time, and with which he was perfectly
well acquainted. The wife and children would, in
the mean time, be supplied with all the necessa-
ries which their condition required, and the
most judicious means should be adopted to turn the
industry of the whole family, as soon as possible, to
account. His Lordship added, that as he could not
ask such a favour of the newspapers as the publication
of all the contributions in money and stamps, he re.
quested that if any of the charitable donors enter-
tained any doubt as to the receipt of their benefac-
tions, they would kindly communicate with Mr.
Pickering, the cashier, at the Mansion House, who
lead mede regular ,entries, and would immediately
ui>on 014v:cc.
a sheriff's officer,
Charles Cartwright, described as

was brought up before kld-rnyin Humphrey, for
further ex o: th,,o-la;ge of
to 'he value (.-T 2.000/. cri. a forge:i wrier, with in,,ent.
to de".raud th I.4.ncloti and North-Wrlstern Railway
Company. Mr. Alderman and Sheriff C-Irden was
on the bench during R portion of the proceedings.
Mr. Clarkson, instructfli by Mr. Hobler, ap-
peared for the prosecution • and Mr. Humphreys
watched the case on behalf of the company,
it appears, dispute their liability for the goods in
question. The prisoner defended himself.

Mr. Alfred Elam confirm,.d his former statement,
which was again read over to him in due form; and
a clerk of the name of Walters, from the London and
North. Western Railway, was called, but he knew
nothing relative to this case.

Mr. Clarkson said he should have wished to have
put in the forged order; hut on account of its being
in the possession of the company he was unable to
do so, and com€quently not in a position to show
that it was or was not in the handwriting of the
prisoner._

Mr. Humphreys said, whateverdocuments mightbe
required, and that were in the possession of the com•
pany, should he forthcoming at the proper time. At
present he was not aware that the order was in the
company's hands. ri the usual course of business it
would fall into their hands, and he had no doubt but
they had it, but he could not speak with any greater
certainty concerning it. It was not their intention
to throw obstacles in the way of the prosectrion of
chip cue, and he (the Learned Gentleman) only at-
tended to watch the proceedings, as the result in
this court might influence ulterior proceedings
else-
where. Mr. Elam had brought his action against
the company, and obtained a verdict, but they were
uow moving for a new trial.

•.
Mr. Clarkson said this was a question of consider-
able importance, and be would therefore a3k for a re-
►nand, as there were very great difficulties in the way
of completing the case. The Learned Counsel said
he would, in the course of a week, be i❑ a position to
prove that the forged order was in the handwriting
of one of the prisoner's compadions, and also, he
trusted, be able to place that party by the side of the
prisoner on the charge of forgery.
Alderman HSJMPHERY asked the prisoner if he had
any objection to this delay.
Prisoner said he was quite satisfied to have the case
thoroughly investigated, and to let it stand upon its
own merits. He could only say again that he never
saw Mr. Elam in his life.—Prisoner was then re-
manded.