The Sun.
London, England, 1834-08-11 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

WESTERN CIRCUIT.--BoDmIN, AUGUST 6.
CRIM CON.—TREVANION V. DANBUZ.
Mr. Sergeant WILDE, with whom was Mr. Sergeant
COLERIDGE and Mr. FOLLETT, stated the case.
This was an action for the seduction of the plaintiff's
wife. The plaintiff and the defendant resided near Truro,
in this county, and were men of high respectability and
ancient families. In 1827 the plaintiff was married to a
Miss Trelawney, both of them being then twenty-four years
of age. Shortly afterwards they went abroad, and in May,
1831, they returned to this country and took up their resi-
dence for a short time at Brompton ; after which they
came to reside near Truro, where the lady's acquaintance
with the defendant commenced. He visited the plaintiff,
and they were on intimate terms, which continued down to
the commencement of this year, when the plaintiff made
some discoveries of an improper intercourse between his
wife and the defendant, which laid the foundation of this
action.

John Burley was present at the marriage of the Plaintiff
with Charlotte Trelawney, at St. George's, Hanover-square,
in June, 1827. They were both twenty-four years of age.
Her father, Mr. Brereton, was formerly Colonel in the
Coldstream Guards. He is now dead. Mrs. Brereton
was present at the marriage. Saw them after the marriage.
There was nothing particular in their conduct. They ap-
peared to live like other married people.
Cross-examined by Sir J. SCARLETT—Was solicitor to
her family. Never saw plates thrown at her head. Her
uncle, Sir Christopher Hawkins, a man of great wealth,
died in 1829.
Mary Ruspini resided at Brompton. The plaintiff and
his wife came to lodge with her in May, 1831. They con-
tinued there until August, when they left for Cornwall.
Mrs. Brereton, the lady's mother, used to visit them. They
appeared to be very happy. They had two children. He
was very fond of them, but she did not appear so. She used
to dine with her mother. They slept in the same bed, and
they never quarrelled while they were there. Understood
that they had come from France.
J. H. Tremayne, Esq., for many years Member for this
county, stated that they had been several time at his house
after their marriage, and that they appeared to him to be
on happy terms.
Rev. Mr. Smith gave evidence to the same effect.
William Endear entered into the plaintiff's service about
Christmas, 1831. He resided then at Parle, near Truro.
The defendant used to come there very often. When mas-
ter was in London the defendant used to visit mistress very
frequently. He staid one night in the room with her from
eight o'clock in the evening till three in the morning. Saw
them romping round the drawing-room. Saw him kiss her.
Master used often to stay away three or four weeks at a
time. Saw her on the defendant's knee, and once, as he
was fetching in lunch, she was rising off his lap. Saw him
in her bed-room. Saw them both in the grounds together
lying down, and when he got up he was brushing her shoul-
ders and his own knees. Carried notes from her to defen-
dant. Saw them carry hay to a corner of the field where
there were trees, and lying down in it. Master was al-
ways very kind to mistress.
Cross-examined.—The defendant did not come often
when master was at home. Master and mistress dined
once at the defendant's, when master left about eight
o'clock to go to London, and mistress remained with the
defendant. Could not say at what time she went home.
Sometimes other gentlemen used to come when master was
from home. Saw other gentlemen romping in the drawing-
room with mistress when master was from home.
Re-examined.---Did not see her alone with any gentle-

man when master was absent, except with the defendant.
When Mr. Taylor visited her there were others present.
Mary Griffiths lived as cook with the plaintiff. Fre-
quently saw the defendant there when master was from
home. Mistress and the defendant used to romp together
in the drawing-room. Was sent with the children in sum-
mer last year to Tilt. Mistress and defendant came one
day together. They sent her and the children out to go on
the water. When they returned, found that the bed was
much rumpled, as if some persons had been lying in it. On
one occasion went to mistress's rcom and found it locked.
Mistress was inside, but would not let her in.
There were five or six other witnesses to the same gene-
ral effect.
Sir J. SCARLET; for the defendant, contended that
there was not evidence from which the Jury would be justi-
fied in inferring a criminal intercourse between the de-
fendant and the plaintiff's wife. But if the Jury should
feel satisfied that adultery had been committed, he main-
tained that the plaintiff, at the utmost, was not entitled to
more than nominal damages. If he could satisfy them,
as he was instructed he could, that the plaintiff had been a
party to his own dishonour, the defendant would be entitled
to a verdict. The fact was, he had been a long time
anxious to get rid of his wife, and there could be no doubt
that he exposed her to temptations with a view to that ob-
ject. The Learned Gentleman then read the following
letter from the plaintiff to the defendant :
Dear Danbuz—l have been much hurt and annoyed by re-
ports which unfortunately have reached me, although I need
not say how thoroughly I am convinced of their fallacy ; but
people seem to tftlk much of your intimacy here, and the
friendship and go.KI feeling which exists between Mrs. Tre-
vanion and yourself, has become the subject of conversation
among some of our worthy neighbours who couple it with harm.
I leave it then to that same good feeling to direct you as to
the path you pursue. It is sinful for me to write on this
unpleasant business ; the manner in which the report has
reached me has male it imperative on me to notice it, false
and groundless as it may be.—Believe me to remain sincerely
yours, J. C. TREVANION.
Saturday, 18th.
The defendant, having replied to this letter, received the
following answer :
Dear Danbuz—l cannot, without the permission of the par-
ties, give up their names. I have no doubt, however, that on
my application I shall be able to give you the information you
require. I assure you that the instant that permission is
granted me I will instantly write to you, as I am anxious as
yourself that the authors shall be discovered.
Yours sincerely,

J. C. TREVANIO,N.
After this correspondence the defendant ceased to visit
at the plaintiff's house, until after a short lapse of time the
plaintiff himself invited him to dine with him, and requested
a renewal of their intimacy. After that the plaintiff used
to go to bed at an early hour, and leave the defendant sit-
ting up with his wife alone. His conduct towards his wife
amounted to a license to her to do what she pleased ; and
under such circumstances he had no right to complain.
Charlotte Stodwell lived with Mrs. Brereton as lady's
maid for five years. Was with her in 1831, when Mr. and
Mrs. Trevanion were at Brompton. He used to dine occa-
sionally at Mrs. Brereton's. He spoke very harshly to his
wife. She was in tears nearly the whole time she was at
Brompton. Saw her once in hysterics. When her
mother said she never saw her in them before, the
plaintiff said, " She often has them now." When she
recovered he said, " Don't be so foolish, Charlotte."
She pushed him away, and said, "It is all your
doing, John ; you are the cause of it all." They
were by no meanshappy. Then they had a nurserymaid,
who was rather good-looking, Used to hear the plaintiff
whispering to her. She was in the family way when she
went away. Heard him say to his wife he wished to God
he was going to get rid of her instead of the nurserymaid.
The morning that Ann Barber, the nurserymaid, was going
away she was crying. The plaintiff said to her " Don't
fret, you will hear from me or see me shortly." Some time
afterwards Mrs. Brereton went to Southsea, where Mr.
and Mrs. Trevanion came. He once went to a ball with
her ; left her there and came home and went to bed. The
defendant came there soon after, when plaintiff said, " My
dear fellow, I hope you are come to stay." One night they
quarrelled, and she came down stairs, and remained all
night in his room. He was always unkind to her. He
left two of Mrs. Wetherington's portraits at Mrs. Brereton's.
Cross-examined--Mrs. Trevanion has been residing-with
her mother since she left her husband.
Mr. Walls, of No. 1, Manchester-square—Mrs. Wether-
ington resided at three different times at her house, where
the plaintiff used to visit her. She had a child and a ser-
vant. The plaintiff used to stay with her until about 12
o'clock. He had been at the opera with her. Witness
thought they had both been to bed together before he left.
Other gentlemen used to visit that lady. A Mr. Walker,
and a Mr. Hillier, who she believed was at the bar—(Loud
laughter)—visited her. She was Colonel Wetherington's
widow. She had one child since the Colonel's death. She
left witness's house on the 14th of July, on which day
plaintiff was there three times. She was hurried off. He
came about twelve o'clock at night on the 14th. - He re-
turned next day, and inquired if she was gone. He said
she would be at Cheltenham the following day. Saw her
a few days afterwards in Upper George-street. She had a
child in March last.
Cross-examined—She came to me as a respectable woman.
All these gentlemen called upon her as friends. Believed
her to be respectable. Was not aware of any improper in-
tercourse with her. Could not say that the plaintiff visited
her for licentious purposes. All the persons who called to
see her were respectable. Her husband (the Colonel) was
dead two years.
Francis Passingham, a solicitor at Truro, was acquainted
for some years with Mr. and Mrs. Trevanion. Dined with
them on the day of the Helston Ball. Plaintiff asked him
to return home with him from the ball, and that he might
sit in the carriage with Mrs. Trevanion. Witness said,
"He might run away with her." " I wish to God, my
dear fellow you would," said he. They made a party once
to go to Falmouth. On their return the plaintiff said that
he would ride in the close carriage, and said to his wife that
the defendant would drive her home in his gig. Had been
left at home with her alone, when the rest of the party went
out. The conduct of the plaintiff towards his wife was by
no means that of an affectionate or careful husband.
Jonathan Peters heard the plaintiff say, of his own child,
" How ugly this child is getting. It's getting like Mrs.
Brereton." Mrs. Trevanion was present. She seemed
very much hurt, and said she never heard anything so
brutal. They did not appear to live on affectionate terms.
The plaintiff told him that the reason why he invited so
many persons to his house, was because he was miserable
when they were alone. Saw her take a kettle off the fire
once, when he said, " Ah, my dear, if Mr. Danbuz was
here, you would not have to take the kettle off the fire."
Sophia Gordon—Was in the service of .Mrs. Stewart,
who resided in Connaught-square. Her mistress had no
husband, but several gentlemen used to visit her. Mr. Tre-
vanion used to visit her, and lend her a horse to ride out
along with him. Ladies visited her also.
Cross-examined—Other persons were there when the
plaintiff called. She never rode out with him alone.
Jane Drew—Went into the service of Mrs. Trevanion
on the 29th of May, 1830. The defendant often visited

the plaintiff, but never dined there. He used to come at
eight o'clock, and go about ten. Master used to go to bed,
and leave him sitting up with mistress. Master was very
unkind to mistress. They did not sleep in the same bed.
Cross-examined—Could not mention any unkind expres-
sion of his to mistress, except when she was going to bed
once he said, " Good God, Charlotte, you are like a great
horse coming into bed."
Richard Taylor used to visit at the Plaintiff's house in
consequence of the Plaintiff's pressing invitations. Was
one day engaged in writing letters there, when angry words
arose between Plaintiff and his wife. Left the room
shortly afterwards. Went into the library, where he found
her crying and much agitated. The Plaintiff's general
conduct towards his wife was unkind. Was often there
along with the Defendant. Plaintiff generally remained
up until the Defendant went away, and left witness along
with his wife. Heard him once say to her, "He wished
she was off." " What would you do without me and my
money ?" replied she, jocosely. ' " I wish I had never seen
you," said he, Heard him say to her once at a dinner
party, " Charlotte, what a beast you are." Once he
returned home from London unexpectedly ; she asked him
the reason. He said he did not wish to tell it before
strangers. Witness went away, and when he saw Plaintiff
next he said the cause of his return was that he had heard

some unpleasant_ reports respecting the defendant and

Mrs. Trevanion.

having briefly summed up the
evidence, the Jury deliberated about ten minutes, and re-
turned a verdict for the plaintiff.—Damages, one farthing.
This trial commenced at nine in the morning, and lasted
until twelve at night.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.-CHESTER, AUG. 8.

RESPITE OF THE MURDERERS UNDER EXTRAORDINARY

CIRCUMSTANCES.
The trial of James Garside and Joseph Mosley, for the
murder, in January, 1821. of Mr. Thomas Ashton, a mas-
ter-manufacturer, at the instigation of the Spinners' Union,
created a most extraordinary degree of interest, not only
from the impenetrable mystery in which it has been involved
during nearly three years and a half, notwithstanding the
large amount of the rewards offered for the discovery of the
p3rpetrators, but from the circumstances under which the
disclosure was made which led to their apprehension. The
implication of the Spinners' Union also served to heighten
the interest, more especiOly as a clue has been obtained to
the parties who actually planned and instigated the murder.
The execution was ordered for this day, and the city has
been a scene of bustle and anxiety all the morning as to
whose duty it is to see the execution done upon the crimi-
nals, whether by the Sheriffs of the City or the High She-