The Sun.
London, England, 1802-12-25 00:00:00

PORTSMOUTH, DEC. 24.

WENT out of Harbour, the Hercules Man of war'

The Boadica, of 4+ guns, and Doris, of 44 guns'
being completely repaired, are to be commissioned!,?
in lieu of the Qiseau and Glenmore.
The quantity of Cables and Rope landed.from the
different Men of War paid off at Plymouth is so grew
that, 14y order of the different Boards, these articles
are to be untwisted, and reduced to twice laid cold'
age for future service.

GIBRALTAR, Nov. 29.

ON the 24th the Niger sailed from hence fat
Malta, with Brigadier General OAKES and his OW/
and two hundred recruits for that garrison.
The St. Fiorenzo is still here wind-bound, she
having made several fruitless attempts to Ot—
through the Gut.
The Cynthia sloop of war sails for Lisbon tile'
first fair wind : the following Officers belenging to
the garrison go passengers in her, in their way t°
England, Major-General WEmys, Colonel Diztil'4"
NIOND of the Bth regiment, and Lieutenant-Colo'
nel BUSBY of the 25th regiment.
On the 26th, Lieutenant-General CASTANEZ,, the
new Commandant ai St. Roque and Al
ges_ras•
came from Algesiras to pay his respefts to OS
ROYAL HIGHNESS the Governor; he was accom•
partied by about thirty Spanish Officers on this oc'
casion, and was saluted by the. Garrison, both oil
his landing and embarking to return.
General CASTANEZ bears a very high cha'
rafter for abilities and integrity, and in his inter
view with His ROYAL HIGHNESS, he is said to have
,s
condufted himself with the utmost liberality and
politeness, offering to do every thing in his power
that could contribute either to the comfort of his
ROYAL HIGHNESS or the-Garrison, or to proto6
a good understanding between the two Countries.'
Indeed nothing can exceed the civility and atten_l
lion of the Spaniards, particularly since the arriv.a."
of His ROYAL HIQIINESS4 among other instal
of their politness, they have not only completelf
repaired the road to Saint Roque, but have CTFI
made a new road for several miles beyond it, ,t°
enable his,carriage to pass without difficulty as ri`'
as the Convent at Almorayna, about fifteen Miles
from this.

On the 20th inst. Lieut.-Colonel Geotteg MAC'
KENZIE, Captain FELIX BRYAN MACDoNAOI
Ensign JOHN LANIGAN, Serjeant ANDREW NUC;
KAY, and Serj. ALEX. SUTHERLAND, all of the lac
Regiment of Fencibles called the Ross and Cin;
marry Rangers, were served with Indiaosenci
stand their Trials before the High Court his,
Justiciary on the 6th Jan. next, on account of g;
melancholy occurrences which happened at Abt;
deen on the evening of the 4th June lasr.
trials are to proceed at the instance of the relatiOn
of those persons who were killed vn that occasion'j
In imitation of the hospitality of Old Engl3ll4
the French Consuls and Ministers are vying w!`
each other, who shall give the most sumptuous ‘31,7
hers to Lord WHITWoRTH, whose conciliating ma'aii
nets have gained him the respe& and esteem of

ranks..
Between thirty and forty years ago, a GentletOrit
now one of the most eminent Bankers in the Metre
polis, being then about nine years old, and in
country with a Lady of Family for his health, saofe,
the door of a poor house a fine Magpye, which
was so eager to purchase, that the woman to whowd:
belonged was sent for the next morning with her bir
she brought with her a blooming boy about: tbr.ile‘i
years old, whom Master no sooner 0;
than he exclaimed, " I will buy the boy too." I vi
bargain, however, was deferred till his father kne
of his desire, which, like that of most children 0
fortune, grew the stronger for opposition ; he 1379
guished for the beautiful child, and such pro Pei,
were made as the mother joyfully accepted. It 0
not in our province to give a history of the progre
of a protege'e's advancement—the Rev, Dr. -7-1:11f
who now holds one of the most valuable livings

the kingdom, was this child.
We are sorry to learn that Mr. RicHAR.O5°/::
of Drury.lane Theatre, has been for some "al
alarmingly indisposed.
0-
the
Mrs. BILLINGTON is sitting to Suer, one
very best Portrait Painters of the present daP.it
With so charming a subject before him, the Art'
may be expected to eclipse his usual excellence.
A General Bill- of all the Christenings and BurlBll,
from Dec. tc, i 801, to Dec. 14, 1 Boz.
Christened in the 97 Parishes within the Walls I
Buried 1305.
Christened in the 17 Parishes without the Walls 4
Buried 4219, Sur
Christened in the n Out Parishes in MiddleSeX and
9329--Buried 8878. • 44
Christened in the lo Parishes in the City and Liberues
Westminster 4684—Buried 4977.
Christened Males 1°564 ?n all 19,918*
Females 9354 3
Buried Males
9559 In all 19,379' •
Females 9490
Whereof have died, 1385
Under Two Years of Age 5925 Fifty and Sixty -* j 353
Between Two and Five 2379 Sixty and Seventy - 696
Five and Ten - 592 Seventy and EighlY, 3`19
Ten arid Twenty . 523 Eighty and Ninety -6;
Twenty and Thirty . 119 Ninety and
Thirty and Forty - 172 A Hundred and Tv°
Forty and Fifty - 2112
Increased in the Burials this Year 51
for the
Bath, the Seat of Fashion and Pleasure tles,
Winter, is at present full of the first Fashionavi'itti
and the Amusements of that City seem to vievoung
each other for the palm of attradion.ll
betbre
Saunders, assisted by his Sister, carry a , htly
them; their inimitable performances are,otlegd
a Hundred
attended b all ranks. Mr. Saunders has tit rot
an elegant Amphitheatre, and on Morlda)irrmaoa
the Performances will be graced with the c.°
Hidoes
and illustrious presence of Their-
Royal
the D44c and pacchcs; q j York,

ISt
:a,

LAW REPokr.

COURT OF KING's BENCH, Dic--24.
11??vsGis RLFORE LORD ELLENDOROWCH AND A SP ;GILL

JURY, IN GUILDHALL, LONDON.

CRINI. CON.

'LINGHAM V. HUNT.
THIS was an Mtion for Criminal Conversation
of the Defendant with the Plaintiff's Wife.
Mr. GARRow opened the Case on the part of the
plaintiff. He observed, it was a great satisfaaion
t° him to have the honour of addressing such a

resPedable jury as he now saw, far he had to bring
before them a subjeal of great importance. The
laintiff complained of the Defendant, that he had
debauched his wife. It was a very grave complaint,
the discussion of which would be important to the
f.sciety in which we live, in point of morals, al-
though it came in the shape of a Civil AEtion. We
lived in an age in which questions of this nature
"me into frequent and melancholy discussion in
Courts of Justice, and in most of which his Learned
friend, who was not yet arrived (Mr. ERSKINE),
who was of Counsel with' Mr. GIBBs for the De-
fendant in this case, had generally had the care of
laintifis in these aftions, and the Public:were much
indebted to him for the share he had in the endea-
vauts made in Courts of Justice to repress this vice ;_
had thesese endeavours had hitherto been ineffeaual, or
at least not produced the effeal to be desired,
ain-v"lstanaling which Courts of Justice must con-
"tie their exertions in the only way they had
Power for this purpose, until it may occur to the
wisdom of the Legislature to annex to this vice the
punishment of a crime. The present case he stated as
tne most aggravated that ever came into a Court of
Justice, and therefore would call on the justice of the
Jury to look upon the Record, and go the foil length
They were there warranted to go, which was the ex-
tent of 50001. For this Defendant had been guilty
of all those alts which tend to aggravate a case of
this kind. He was the Friend and Confidant Compa-
nion of the Plaintiff, and he, while he was thus
professing that friendship, and in the possession of
that confidence, debauched the Plaintiff's wife.--s
It was a case of absolute purity on•the part of the
?laintifF, and absolute profligacy on the part of the
Defendant. On behalf of the Plaintiff, he invited,
nay he challenged his opponents, with all their paw_
ers, to shew a single fault in his chara&er and con..
tiaa towatds his wife ; and when they had done, he
Would tell theni that lie did not mean to abate one
shilling of the damages. stated upon this Record.
Although he had long communications from his
Client, he would not state them up to their extent,
that was beyond his power ; but he should borrow
a phrase from his Learned Friend, and say, that in
the.condti& of this Defendant, he was able to trace
the Adulterer's Course: and a part of this course
`was this-a-when he had succeeded in debauching, or
perhaps when he had not completed his objed, but
had reason to hope he soon should, he looked about
him hoar he was to fence against Justice, and gene-
rally he persuaded the viEtim of his lust to be
instrumental in shewing something against the cha-
tatter of the Plaintiff. Something known only to
herself and some domestic, and this was to be made
vp into negligence in the husband, so that he was
not to be entitled to Damages-in a Court of Justice.
Something, perhaps, of this kind might be attempt-
ed to-day, unless, indeed, the discretion of, the
Learned Counsel was allowed to over-rule the ini-
quitous disposition of the Defendant ; but if it
thaold, he knew who would be the sufferer by it.
The Plaintiff's wife was now under what the De-
fendant called his protedion, but -the truth was,
that she lived with him in the most degraded state
that a. woman can be in, having lost her virtue, and
with it, of course, her charnter—so that she could
Ito more, be received into that decent circle of friends
and acquaintance, to which she was once an orna-
Them, and therefore, she was now driven by dire
necessity to embark in the iniquity of the Defend-
°,,nts and enter on one common cause with him----
Some things of this kind he was prepared to expert,
for they had been thrown out with a view of de-
terring the Plaintiff from coining forward in a Court
of Justice, but they had not the desired dila.—
lie should now proceed to shew how these parties
came together. The Plaintiff was a very young
man, and in partnership with a• Gentleman of the
name of Hopley; in the trade of a wine merchant. He
was married on the 16th of August, 'Soo, to the
Lady whose miscondua with the Defendant formed
the subjed of inquiry to-day.' She was only 18
Years of age when married, but extremely handsome
and well accomplished. They lived near to the
Defendant, who isengaged in the same line of trade,
who was also at that dine married to a very amiable
and most deserving Lady; for. Mrs. Hunt had all
those good qualities which render acquaintance and
friendly intercourse between families most desirable;
accordingly; as Mr. Lingham and. Mr. Hunt were
intimate, Mrs, Hunt arid Mrs. Lingham became
friendly
also, and visited each other frequently.--a
Soon afterwards Mrs. Hunt died in child.bed, the
infant surviving. On this occasion Mr. Hunt con-
duaed himself as a man should, with great tender-
ness to the infant, and great apparent sorrow for
the loss of its mother. Left thus, without the pro_
tetion of the mother, it became necessary to find
Out somebody to take care that all servants, and
those who had the charge of nursing the infant,
should riot negle& their duty, and Mrs. Lingham
took upon herself this kind office, which naturally
drew the families closer together than they had been
Yet. It was in this state, sacred as it was by all
the affetlion of the two families, and rendered still
Te so by the kindness of Mrs. Lingham, that the
Defendant, Mr. Hunt, meditated the diabolical
1,02 ar! of seducing the Plaintiff's wife, of which the
-Pi jatiff had not the least reason to be jealous, for
the two'families had been in the constant habit of
7.lsiting each other, nor was there the least diminu-
':nn in the affeaion of Mrs. Lingham to her husband,
24-this would appear from the evidence of the
Witnesses on both sides, if the Defendant was in-
ack
:ht,;
enough to insist on his Counsel calling any ;
° to his astonishmenta on the Sth of July last,
when Mrs Lingham,: who had been attending the
f.°l"Gerat . -01 the day in his business, came homey he
ie wife Nvll not there. The evening having
'‘
a, a"eed he honed she Might be at her father's.—
ase seat • she
oWas taut awe, He n t tc”cocother

-6f he relations, but no tidings could be had of Ler. ;
at last he concluded that she had gone to the house
of some friend. As the night advanced, he thought
a thousand things that might have befallen his wire,
but. had no idea of the thing which had actually
happened, namely, that his own confidential friend
had induced her to elope with him, to the dishonctir
of all the farnily, and ruin of herself. The jury
should guess his astonishment when he received
a letter from the Defendant, which Mr. GARRow
said he should read to the Jury, by which the De-
fendant's guilt would appear in its true light. He
charged on the Defendant, that he pursued the
course of the most iniquitous Adulterer ; that he
formed a deliberate plan for the seduction of the
Plaintiff's wife, to. the violation of die most sacred
ties of friendship, in breach of all the rules of hos-
pitality, in treachery to all. the trusts reposed in
him. By what evidence was this to be made out ?
By the Defendant's own evidence, for this would
appear from the Defendant's own letter, by which
he charaaerized his own conduct, after which it
was doubtful whether he ought to be permitted to
say any thing that could reduce the damages one
shilling below that which was stated upon the Re-
Cord, for the damages he had by his own condud
estimated.

he letter which the Defendant sent on the 9th
of July was as follows :

SIR,

" With sorrow, great, how can I announce to you, you
have most inis,:rably misplaced in me your confidence ; your
wife cannot return but with your forgiveness, which is im-
possible—l think I see, however, the situation of my poor
brother, who, as well as Eliza, yourself, and myself, must
go distracted. Still your's,

" JOS. HUNT."

Mr. GARROW having commented on this Letter,
then proceeded to detail the rest of the Case. That
about ten o'clock at night on the Bth of July last,
the Defendant prevailed on the Plaintiff's wife to
go w ith him in an Hackney coach to Windmill_
street, where he took a post chaise, and having
delivered two letters to the proprietor of the chaise,
direding him to send them immediately to the city,
went off to Barnet, arrived at the Green Man Inn
that night, and there he and Mrs. Lingham slept in
one bed, and had lived in adultery ever since.—
Having thus briefly opened the outline of the Case,
he desired to know what was to be offered for
the Defendant in it by way of extenuation of his
offence, and he said he should be glad to know
what damages could be said to be too large. He
had heard it said indeed, the City of London was a
bad venue for an Alion for Criminal Conversatioai,
as if notions of Honour, and the value of happiness
in connubial life, diminished in this mighty Capital
when we came Eastward of Temple Bar. No such
thing---they `were gross and impudent libellers who
said so, and they were ignorant of the real feel-
ings of London Merchants, who indeed tendered the
comforts cf human life and every thing that was
estimable in the human charader, as well as any
body of men in the world ; and why should they
not ? Who were more deeply interested in the
well-being of Society than they were ? He con-
cluded with repeating, that after the whole of this
Case was gone through, he was confident that the
Jury would give the whole amount of the damages
, stated in the Record.

The marri:lge of the Plaintiff with his wife, then
Eliza Dixon, spinster, was then proved by the Rev.
Mr. Batt, who officiated, and by Jos. Dixon, the
Lady's brother. It took place on the 16th of Aug.
ISOo, in the Parish church of. Sr. Botolph Without,
Aldgate.

Miss Frances Merehant.--" I am perfe ly well
acquainted with Mr. and Mrs. Lingham ; I was in
El
the habit of visiting at their house; I have re.
sided with them rather more than a week at a time.
I have been with them more than once ; they ap_
peated to me to he living very happily together.
They had a child ; I never saw in their deportment
towards each other, any thing which led me to
believe that they were not entirely happy. I
visited them in 'Sot. I live in Islington. I be-
lieve" was on a visit in the family in the beginning
of the present year also."

Benjamin Watets—" I know the Plaintiff per_
feetly well. I have known him from his child-
hood ; we were at school together. He is about
my age, 27 or 28. lam married ; have a family
that was in the habit of visiting Mr. and Mrs.
Lingham. Mr. Lingham behaved towards his wife
in every resped as an exemplary husband, as far as
I had an opportunity of knowing, and these oppor-
tunities were very frequent. He and Mrs. Ling_
ham appeared to me to be perfealy happy ; indeed
remarkably so. I think that Mrs. Lingharn visited
at my house up to July in the preient year, and up
to that period they appeared to me to live happily
together."
Cross.examined by Mr. E.RSKIWE, he said, " I
am well acquainted with Mr. and Mrs. Lingham;
they visited rny family frequently. I remember
hearing a conversation about their having gone to
see the 'illuminations. I remember Mrs. Lingham
saying something about their separation in the nigh t
of the illumination, perfeetly well, but nothing about
a tavern ; but that she and a Gentleman had supped
together, and had fared better than the rest of the
company, who were obliged to put up with what
they could get at a Pastry-cook's. That they had
separated from the rest of the company opposite to
M. Otto's house, and could not find their com-
pany, who went to: a Pastry-cook's; but that they
had fared better, and had supped. Mr. Lingham
heard Mrs. Lingham say this ; and he treated it
with that raillery or badinage which a man, who
had confidence in the virtue of his wife, would do
a trifling thing -so small.. He spoke to me, but I
gave no opinion upon the matter. I do not now
think there was any thing bad in it, from the man.
ner in which it was related : the idea that I had
was, that they had supped at some, friend's house.
There was nothing that .passed which led me to
suppose any thing against the virtue of Mrs.
Lingham. Ido not know who the ecutpany were,
but there were Ladies and Gentlemen present.

Mr. Lingham joked about it, and said it was very
well for her that she fell into such good quarters."
Mr. Dixon, brother ro the Plaintiff's wife—" I
was one of the party who went to see the illumina-
tion; my family and that of Mr. Lingharrt went
together. There were twenty of us nearly The
crowds 1n alrriGzt all parts, wcm inauenseo We
missed part of our company when we o,u n 4 Mrt

, .
C.)tt(l'6. Mrs. tingitani vas u►uder the care of Mr.
Mint, And One of-my sisters and Mrs. Lingham'.
sister were under the care of Mr. Lingham,
separated indeed before we came to M. Otto's; at
Mr. Hope's house; from whence we went to M.
Otto's, and afterwards we went to a Pastry-cook's
and took some refreshment, and then came home.

It did not strike me to be any thing extraordinary,
that in so great a crowd some of our party should

be missing from the rest."
Cross-examined by Mr. ERSKINE, he said, " I
am the brother of this Lady ; it so happened that
Mr. Hunt had the care of Mrs'. Lingham. Mr.
Hunt was an entire stranger to me. We walked
all the way from Tower-hill to Cavendish-square,
and during all that time Mr. Hunt had the care of
Mrs. Lingham. They separated from us about
eleven o'clock, but I cannot say eadly the time.
We went round the Square, to set if we could find
them. Mr. Lingham did not accompany u.s in our
search. When we came back we found him, but
not Mrs. Lingham and the Gentleman who was
with her. I remained with the rest of the com-
pany. I should suppose it was near two o'clock
before we reached home. We went to a Pastry-
cook's in St. James's Street in our return home.
Mrs. Linghatn, I believe, did not come home then ;
but I did not go to Mr. Lingharn's house. I have
heard, that Mrs. Lingham supped with Mr. Hunt
that night. I have known, that since that affair
happened, Mr. Hunt drove. her out in his chaise."
Mrs. Sarah Lingharn. " lam the mother of the
Plaintiff.--I remember his marriage with Miss
Dixon ; I have seen them often after marriage : I
have every reason to believe that they were as
happy as any two laeople could be. She was an
agreeable, accomplished young woman. I never
saw any body more attentive to a wife than the
Plaintiff was to his, insomuch, that I should be
happy to have a daughter of mine treated with the
same kindness and affetion. I saw them down to
the very time of her elopement. I only know Mr.
Hunt by name. I know my daughterain-law was
intimate with Mrs. Hunt : I have heard both my
son and daughter speak of Mrs. Hunt."
Mr. Newman, the stable keeper in Windmill_
street, and his two boys, proved that the Defendant,
Mr. Hunt, and Mrs. Lingham, came to his house
in a hackney-coach on the Bth of July, about half
after ten, and took a post-chaise to go to Barnet.
That Mr.- Hunt gave to Mr. Baily two letters,
direled to persons in the City, and which were
delivered the following morning at six o'clock, the
one of them to the Plaintiff's father by mistake,
who delivered it immediately afterwards to the
Plaintiff; the Other to the Defendant's brother.
That he was taken in the post-chaise to Barnet.
Sarah Lintel, chamber-maid at the Green Man at
Barnet, proved that the Defendant and the Plain-
tiff's wife arrived at the inn about half after one
o'clock, where they supped, and then went to bed,
and slept in one bed all night. That a Gentleman
came and asked for Mr. Hunt the next morning,
and the chamber-maid went up, when' she saw the
Lady in bed. She knew her name was Lingham,
for she saw that svritten at full length upon her
stocking ; that Gentleman went away in the course
of the morning, returned, again, and went away
a second time before Mr. Hunt and Mrs. Lieg-
ham. Mr. Hunt went out into the Town and
bought some stockings for Mrs. Lingham, fur
those she had were very dirty.
It thenappeared, that Mt. Hunt and Mrs. Ling_
ham called at the house of Mrs. Lingham's'Laun_
dress at Holloway, and there took change of
clothes.
The Defendant's letter to the Plaintiff in Tower-
street, where they both live and carry on trade. as
Wine Merchants, of which we gave a copy in our
sketch of the Speech of Mr. GARROW, was then
given in and read.
Mrs. Fillairst, who lives at Eltham, proved that
a Mrs. Robinson took lodgings in her . house, and
that Mr. Hunt and Mrs. Lingham lived together
there, going by their names of Mr. Hunt and Mrs.
Lingham, and making no secret of it. •
Here the Case for the Plaintiff closed. Mr..
ERSKINE made a long-and very eloquent speech on
behalf of the Defendant, in which he admitted
the wisdom of the principle on which these Ac-
tions had been determined, and professed entire
attachment to that moral rectitude which keeps us
together in society, and which adultery t€nds to
disturb. He admitted that his Client could not be
justified in what he did-; on the contrary, he,.
though his Counsel, was bound to blame him ; but
yet he maintained there were shades innumerable in
this offence. Where a man,-had violated all the
rules of Hospitality, the ties of Friendship, and had
been a deliberate seducer, he deserved every scourge
that could be inflitted on him in a Court of justice ;
but where he had been exposed to a blaze of
beauty, without that sort of caution from the hus-
band, who was the natural guardian of the honour
of the wife, and where the husband had been re-
miss and negligent as to the safety of the wife, and
had permitted her, who was young and beautiful,
gay and lively, to be too often unheeded and alone
in the company of the Defendant, who was also an
unmarried man ; and where a man under such cir-
cumstances had not been proof against so much
temptation, he was the objed of the compastiion of
men of feeling, nor should he be rigorously treated
in a Court of Justice. Such he contended •to be
the case of his Client, the present Defendants The
parties were indeed all of them objets of great
compassion ; he did not censure the Plaintiff—most
undoubtedly his loss was great. He did not justify
the Defendant, for most assuredly his condad was
criminal ; but he submitted that it was not the con-
dud of an hardened offender,. but of one whose
sorrow and repentance accompanied his transgres-
sion. This, Mrs ERSKINE submitted, was to be
inferred from the letter he wrote to the Plaintiff.
He was sorry for what had happened : but it would
appear that the Plaintiff had repeatedly been ad-
monished of the impropriety of allowing his wife
and the Defendant to be so much together ; but that
he had been careless notwithstanding ; had suffered
them to go out riding. together, and instead of ac-
companying them, had gone a fishing, Seca and
had, under pretence of taking. care of his wife, sent
an infant with-. her and the Plaintiff on their
elusions., When ; they came home, he had only
cotarriairml thi3 they wete late, and said, his wite

r-r
•

. .
not.st:iy ou'c. S')late ; but Litt tzai
they shotild net go together any more, which he
ought to have. That he lived opposite io the
house of the DAmd int ; and tln after the Ds!..t

fendant and the Plait:6ll'llA come into the Defend.:.
ant's house, after they had been out all day together;
be had sent for the k,,vs to get what he wanted !or
himself, and left his wile with the Defendant at sup.,.
per, where they were together nhtil eleven at. night-.
That on the night of the illmnination for tll Peacci
a large party went out together front Tower-stteet.t
The Plaintiff, instead of taking care of his wife,;
allowed that charge to be taken by the Mfendants
he taking another :Lady tinder his arm. That Wiled
they came to the house of M. Otto, they scparatedit
%, hen the Plaintiff she wed no anxiety about his wife,;
while some of the company went to seek for them.
That the Defendant and the Plaintiff's wiP supped
togetiier, and that at a Tavern. That above all,
the Plaintiff's wife told him that she had supped at
a Tavern with the Defendant, who treated tile that-1
ter with raillery or badinage, as tine of the Wit_
nesses described it. Here. Mr. Ertsr.r NE ini,isted upcii
it he ought to have stopped the acquaintance of his
wife and the Defendant :e he ought to have told
" hitherto I ain willing to believe that you have
not dishcinoureci me, but it is fitting that We shill
be two. I forbid you my house for the•futUre., and,
I will take care that neither myself or any pact of
my fatnily ;•h..111 come into -your's ;" and if the De-
fendant had afterwards visited his wife, the Plaintiff'
would have been justified in using the extreme
of violence towards him, for it would then have
been planting a dagger in the bosom of the Plaintiff'
by his presence ; but unfortunately the Plaintiff had
wanted that species cf firmness which was requisite
on this occasion; he had been remiss and negligent;
and although that would not excuse the Deft:dant,
it would greatly mitigate the damages in this ease.
—He expatiated upon these topics at considerable
length with his usual ability, and concluded with
observing, that where the Plaintiff had been so
negligent, and claimed damages in a civil aEtions
for the loss of that, to preserve which, it was his:
duty .to be careful, he should not take advantage of.
his own negligence, and obtain large damages
against the roan who, next to himself, had been mast
unfortunate.

Mr. Charles Hunt examined by Mr. Gists.----
" I am the brother of the Defendant : previous td
the time when this unfortunate event took place, I
was not very much in the habits of intercourse with
him, for I had had a difference ttith him : that dif.;
Terence took place on account of this transaBion : I
was one of the party who 'vent to see_tlie
tions : I went with the party from Tower street
Mr. and Mrs. Lingham were of the party, which
was about twenty in number, my brother was one
of them ; he had the care of kl,rs. Lingham, and she
took his arm ; she is about twenty, aria she is
very handsome : Mr. Lingham was walking
alone, and flinging crackers• about the Ladies
—When we got to Cavendish-square, at Mr:
Hope's, we separated and made three partiesl
my brother and Mrs. Lingham were lost to us
we went in search of them, but Mr. Lingham did
not join in the pursuit, but her brother and myself
did ; we went partly around the square,, but we
could not find them. Mr. Lingham did not expresl
any apprehension, but seemed very careless.: I
believe he did not go in pursuit of his wife. We
then went to M. OTTO'S in Portm:4n-qitare, and.
from thence to the Pastry Cooll's in Saint.fames's-
street, where we refreshed ourselves ; I had not
seen any thing of Mrs. Lingham at that time, not'
had any steps been taken by Mr. Lingham to find
where she was. From the Pastry Cdok's we went
through the City home. When we got home
in-
quiry was made for. Mrs. Lingham, hut she was not
returned. We got home between ,two and
After we had got out of the square we had no
difficulty in getting away: I do not know wheri
Mrs. Linghain came home. Afterwards, and on the
first of May, I saw Mr. Lingharri, and a party was
proposed for Mrsi Lingham that day. I was at
tea with Mrs. Lingham and some ladies: Mt:
Lingham came to the room : Mt's. Lingham said to
.Mr. Lingham, that, Mr. Hunt had desired her 10
take a ride the next day with him in his chaise: I
observed.to Mr. Lingham, he had better borrow ms
brother's other horse to go with them ; Mr. Ling..
ham declined it, saying that he was going a fishing:
Mrs. Lingham did go out with my brother' thd
next day ; Mr. Lingham `did not accotripany thetrio
but went a fishing.l remember Mr. Hurst and
Mrs. Lingliath returning that evening ; they came
to my brother's about eight in the evening ; while
they were there Mr. Lingliam sent for a certairt
key..

CHIEF JUSTICE. Q. To Mrs. ?---4
A. To Mrs. Lingham : she sent it, and con:
tinted at my brother's after that i she staid to sup-
per, and after supper, till eleven at night. Mr-
Lingharri.was invited, but did not come over, On
the Sunday following, I was one of a party at Ken.
sington Gardens, with Mrs: Lingham and Mr..
Hent t there were about a dozen of us. Eefore
they went to Kensington Gardens, they took a
cheon at my brother's house ; Mrs Lingham .was
there, and Miss Dixon, with some Country Friends,
There was then some conversation concerning what'
passed on the night, of the ilhnnination. Mrs.;
Lingham observed, that she had been at a Tavern
with my brdther, and had some beef and a cool
tankard. Mr, Lingham observed, that they had fared
better than we had, for that we had been obliged
to put up with a Pastry Cook's Shop. Ido not reA
member that Mr. Lingham took any further notice.
—After this we went to Kensington Gardens, Mrs.:.
Linghatn and. Mr. Hunt together. My brother and
Lingham attended Mrs. Lingham in the Gar
dens. On the I irh of May I remember Mrs,-
Lingham going out with my brother--I am speak-
ing of the • tith of. Maya. It was Saturday the Ist
of May, that I offered Mr. Lingham the horse,
It was Sunday the zd that they went out, and she
gave hire the key: It was Sunday the oth, when
the conversation took place about going to the
tavern. I remember their r,ettnning home on the
rzth, before that Mr. Linghain was with tte at my
brother's. house. I went with him to fence by his
desire. I was standing at a neighb4ut he
took me by the coat, and slid lievishcdrhe to go
_atad.fence with him, and that he had something par_
' tiZtliar t 4 communicate; I had a prim' engavtnent

1

S

hich I put off, and went with him to fence.
All he said as heAvent along was, " Do
_you
kt ow where Mrs. Lingham is." I "said "No
I.do nor. I have not been home this afternoon."
Then we want to fence. - Mr. Lingham observed,
going along, he did not dike Mrs. Lingham being
so much at our house. Mr. Lingham went with
me from the fencing-school to my brother's house.
I inquired of the servant at my brother's house.
where Mrs. Lingham was—l learnt that she had
been there that afternoon, but had gone with Mr.
Hunt a.riding in,his chaise. I asked Mr. Ling-
ham to walk upstairs and take a game of cribbage
with me until they should return. Some time after
dark, between nine and ten o'clock,• they returned ;
the chaise came to Mr. Lingham's door ; I heard
stop, and Mr. "Lingham and myself went over. Mr.
Lingham helped Mrs. Lingham out of the chaise,
and observed to my brother, that he should not suf-
fer him again to keep-Mrs. Lingham Out so late, or
after dark.—When we were at cribbage, I told hiM
I thought it was very improper for my brother to
keep Mrs. Lingham- out so late, and that I should
not suffer it if I were hitn.—My brother is about
one.and thirty."

Cross-examined by Mr. GAR it OW I had no
difference with my brother before this time. I
cannot say whether my brother is a man of general
good charter and manners, f:.,- I have been out of
the -Country for seven years, and have only return-
ed to England fourteen months: While my brother
was married, he was a grave man in his manners.
He 'was married seven or.eighr years to .a very
amiable and as worthy a woman as I ever knew. I
am now in mourning for my brother's child. He
Ibst Mrs. Hunt-about last March, she died in con.
sequence ofchild-birth. The. Child survived, it is
the eldest child that is lately dead, he lost that
child about a fortnight ago. He hadfour children by
his wife. Mrs. Hunt and Mts. Lingham were never
Much together; never out together. Mrs. Lingham
was a great deal at our house after my sister-in-law's
death: lam in the coal.trade. I have no concern
iA the business-with my brother. I 'have not said
that I had .a concern with-my. brother in business.
Ihave concerns which I wish to settle with him. I:
never said, if there should be a verdiEt against him
for heavy darriages, he must fall, and that I must
fall with him ; to the best of my recolleftion, h do.
not know that I ever - said any Such. thing." This
question was repeatedly prest Upon the witness, and-
he always denied tltk. he did it, 'to the best of his
recollection ; box 'he never positively denied it.—
He then admitted that he had gone -to Barnet in
consequence of a letter from his brother, which was
sent at the same time that- the Plaintiff received the
letter,-which we have given a copy of in the open.
ing he admitted that he met his brother and Mrs.
Lingham together at Barnet, left them there, and came
to Town'; went back, and returned again on the same
day in his brother's catriage, and left them there
again. He denied any knowledge about 'his brother
and Mrs. Lingham living together at Eltham since
that time, said that he never heard of ifuntil.this day
in Court. He was Nest a great deal, whether he had
not said to th 7 Attorney, when he was subpoenaed,
that he knew the refreshment which was taken by
his brother and Mrs. Lingham, on thenight of the
Illumination, -was-- at • the Spring,Gardens, at the
Confedioner's there, at Monet's. He denied he
ever said any .thing of the name of Monet, that he
did not know it. He said that he never did say it
was at the Spring,Gardens they took their refreSh_
merit, to the best of his knowledge, again, but he
could not swear it positively. ,He had heard it
was there, but he did riot know very well how he -
heard it, &c. it was in different conversations, &c.
jusT c B —in the conversation yOu- alluded-
to concerning the refreshment taken by your bro_.
ther and -Mrs. Lingham, Spring-Gardens was men-
tioned, but no place there A. Yes, Spring-Gar,
dens.-

Q. Neither Tavern nor any thing else was men-
tioned, but was only said at. Spring. Gardens ? A.
Yes, only at Spring-Gardens..
ONE OF THE.JURY--Inthe first part of his exa-
mination, lie expressly said at a Tavern.
CHIEF JUSTICE, " Yes, he did say so, Sir."
Mr. ElkilCl NE and Mr. GlBBa:proposed to call
back the witness, that his Lordship might put the
last question again, for that they apprehended the
witness had mistaken the question, or he would not
have answered it in that way ; but his Lordship re-
fused, observing, that the evidence shOuld stand as
it was, for that it would-be infinitely dangerous to
let a witness mend his last answer, as soon as he
found it contradifted someaaterial part of his for-
mer evidence.

Anne Atwood had lived servant with Mr. and
Mrs. Lingham four months. 'She proved nothing
for the Dcfmdant ; but being cross-examined gave
material evidence for the Plaintiff.

Q. Did you ever in your life see a more affec.
tionate, kind, attentive husband than your Master ?
—A. Never in my life.
/Vice Barton lived servant also with Mr. and
Lingham. She was examined for the Defend-
ant) for whose case she proved nothing, but gave
material evidence for the Plaintiff—She said, " I
remember Mrs. Lingham coming home and Mr.
Lingham coming home with her--I remember her
coming from her husband's bed to my bed, but why
I do not know."

Cross-examined for the Plaintiff by Mr. GAR_
stow.---Q. " Upon your solemn oath, did you ever
See a happier, or a kinder pair to each other, than
Mr. and Mrs. Lingham-P'—A. " No, Gentlemen,

never."

Q. " Your mistress had a child when she came
one night to your bed from your master's ?"--
A. Yes."

Q. " You were the nurse of it ?"—A. " Yes."
Q. '' The child cried ?"—A. " Yes."
Q. " And the mother came to " Yes."
Q. '' And then returned to her husband's bed ?"
—A. '' Yel."

Q. " Upon your solemn oath did you ever see the
slightest impropriety in the condna of Mrs. Ling_
ham in your life ?"—A. '' No, except with Mr.
'Hunt. They used to meet in Cheapside, and part
again, but I never saw them go into a house loge_.
tiler, or into a coach." -

Mr. Eitsulit-suid he ihould.call no more .vi.
dente.

Mr. GARROW replied with great' rage at the
conduit Of the Defendant in this most infamous
transaaion. He felt not the least scruple in say-
ing, that the Defendant's brdther had endeavoured
to support his cause by dired and absolute perjury;
and he repeated the sentence, by direct: And abso-
lute perjury. He assigned parts of his evidence,
on 'which, he said, it was manifest that the case
was so. He protested that he never saw so ini-
quitous.a case as that attempted to be set up by the
Defendant in the whole course of his life ; but the
combined iniquity and of the Defendant, had
controled the
,good sense and sound 'discretion of
his Learned Counsel ;-had he listened to the advice'
of Mr. ERSKINE, Mr. Givasy'and Mr. MAItRYAT,
he would have saved the scene of diiguce which
his defence exhibited. •He Was now again entitled
to repeat, that the Jury would look at the Record,
and because they there found the damages stated at.
50301., they would not go beyond that sum ; but
he was sure they would not give one farthing less.

Lord ELLENBOROUGH addresSed the Jury,-and
observed, that this case deserved their most serious
attention.—The Plaintiff by this action complained
that the Defendant, by the seduftion of the Plaintiff's
wife, had deprived him of all the happiness and all
the honour which marriitge brought to him in social
life, in the several important rerations of Parent,
Husband, and Man.-,-It"ippeared. that the-Defend_.
ant had the implicit confidence of the Plaintiff=he
had betrayed it—nor could anyone use stronger
language against the 'Defendant than he had used
himself--for he said, you have—most miserably
-reposed "in me your confidence."—Had the Defend-
ant felt that contrition he expeded the Court to be-
lieve, he might either have suffered judgMent to have
past against hiin' by' default, or collie into Court•
by Counsel with }nimble instructions to watch the
proof on the, part of the Plaintiff, and trusted
the disercet observations which his -Counsel would.
have made, and in which he would not have been-
disappointed. His Lordship then reprobated- the
idea of supposing that a roan gives •up the virtue
-of his wife, .So :IS to, lose his right to claim da.-
mages for Adultery; Merely, because he had suf-
fered his wife to lay hold of the arm of another'
iii a crdwd at an illumination. This was -too. ,
profligate even for this. immOral Age, so prone
to seek excuses for Adultery. His Lordship an'_
madverteron the evidence Of the Defendant's bre".„
the-r with 'great force, and made many excellent
observations. His Lordship concluded with t
serving, that upon the evidence nothing appeared'
against the Plaintiff, for his case was satisfadorily
made out, and that nothing occurred to his mind
that could shield the Defendant from making as full
and ample a cOmiiensation to the Plaintiff as the Jury
in their opinion of, justice, should be disposed to
make : for it was an anion by a man, who, upon
the evidence, had fulfilled all the moral obligations
which belonged to him, and against a man who ,had
violated every moral obligation that one man can
owe to another.

The Jury, in less than one minute, gave. a verdia
for the Plaintiff. Damages—soool. being the
whole sum stated in the Declaration.

COMMON PLEAS (GUILDHALL), Dzc, 13.
SIMPKIN 'V. READ.

This was an ailion to recover the value of four
pipes of Madeira wine, which the Defendant had
been dire&ed to insure.

The Plaintiff, who keeps the Crown and Anchor
Tavern, in the Strand, had ordered his Agent in
Madeira to furnish him with four pipes of %vine for
his own use. It was accordingly shipped for Eng-
land, and a Bill of Exchange sent to the Del:ndant,
drawn upon the Plaintiff. A clerk took the Bill to
the Crown and Anchor for acceptance, and received
an order for the Defendant to insure the wine in a
regular manner. The Clerk immediately delivered
his orders, but they were judged insufficient with,„
out being given in writing ; he was therefore sent
again to inform the Plaintiff that a verbal order for
the Insurance would not do.

The Witnesses for the Plaintiff', Mr. Simpkin, jun.
and the Clerk of the house, stated, that after the
order had been verbally given, they had not seen
the Clerk return again for any other.
The young man was positive that he had been to
the Plaintiff's house, to obtain a written order ; but
could not direly stve, whether the person he saw
and spoke to was Mr. Simpkin, or any other.

Lord ALVANLRY observed to the Jury, that it
was evident a mistake had been made on one side or
the other ; but it was left for them to decide upon the
grounds of probability, which appeared most entitled
to belief. If the Defendant had been led into an
error by the inattention and miscondul of his Clerk,
and it appeared. to the jury such was the case, they
would give a verdi& for the Plaintiff; but, if they
thought that the young man had delivered his
orders, .and the Plaintiff had received them without
attending to the regular rules of the Defendant's
house, which made a written order necessary, they
would, on such belief, find their verdia for the
Defendant—Verdia for the Plaintiff.

DECEMBER 24..
NEWMAN V. WILLIAMSON.

THE Plaintiff keeps a lodging house for Sailors in
Shakespeare-walk, near Wapping, and this Adion
was brought for the sum of 211. 17s. Bd. for board,
lodging, washing, and other articles, supplied to
the Defendant, who is a seafaring 'man. ft ap-
peared by the evidence of Mr, White, Clerk to the
Defendant's Attorney, that the original demand of
the Plaintiff was only 61. 15s. which sum was paid
into Court ; but an alion of trover having been re-
covered against him, for unlawfully detaining the
Defendant's clothes, he thought proper to tack the
costs of that adion to his claim, and arrested
,the
Defendant for 211. 17s. Bd.
As soon as this circumstatice was stated, Serjeant
Cot:KELL threw up his brief.—Plaintiff Nonsuited.

PRICE O 1•
YESTE

Sink Stock xB6 7
Naey 5 per Cent. shut
; rer Cent.l97, 101
•
I rish 5 per Cent.
4 per Lent. c:On.-Ssqli
3 per Cent. Red. loa- t
3 per Cent. Co ~shut
limo Scrip •
Bank L.Ann. 20'3,16i
Ditto Short Ann.•
Ditto Scrip