The Sun.
London, England, 1834-08-01 00:00:00

drawers, Read took thereout a small paper parcel, observing,
" I've got my money, and the drawer may go and be d—d,"
and 'Allen was standing by at the time.
Charles Neale and Law Simms, whose names have been
already mentioned, were called, and stated that the witness
Large had made use to them of the words about becoming a
witness for Reeve, which he had denied on his examination in
chief. Simms is nephew to Reeve, and Neale, who is the
keeper of a beer-house, had been twice fined for being drunk.
One of these conversations was stated to have taken place at a
public-house called the Hare, and the. witness, who admitted
that he was "fresh, but not so drunk but what he could
stand," could not say that Large and another man did not lead
him home on the night of the supposed conversation, on ac-
count of his inability to walk home without support. He was
much pressed on this point, but could get no further than that
he was not so assisted to the best of his recollection.

It will be borne in mind that the boy Cutting deposed to a
scene he was supposed to have witnessed in the brewhouse of
the Ship Inn, on the 4th of September, in which Allen and
Nesbitt, and two women, bore prominent parts. In order to
contradict him one of the women was called. She stated that
true it was she was at that place on that day, but that she had
gone with the other girl and Nesbitt, and that they were not
for a moment in the brewhouse in company with Allen, who
did not enter it till they were quitting it. In addition to this
she swore that she never saw the boy Cutting till last Sunday,
and that neither Allen nor Nesbitt, nor any other person, pro-
duced any jewels of any description to her in the brewhouse,
or at any other time or place. The other woman was not
called.

Mr. Reeve deposed he found in Mrs. Pyne's reticule, which
he took from her person as she lay dead on the deck, monies
and Exchequer bills amounting to 4481. 35., which were given
to Mr. Pyne.
Two persons were also called, who had known the prisoner
for a great many years, and had intrusted him with large
sums of untold money, and who spoke in the highest terms of
his honour and unimpeachable honesty, and of the general
character he bore.

The above is a faithful outline of the evidence on the one
side and on the other in this singular case, which we have
noticed at considerable length in consequence of the respecta-
bility of the parties accused, and of the remarkable nature of
the case itself.

Mr. Justice BOSANQUET summed up the evidence with mi
nutess and perspicuity, and the
Jury returned a verdit of Not Guilty.

OXFORD CIRCUIT, SHREWSBURY, JULY 30.
The commission for this county was opened yesterday, and
the business commenced this day at half-past 12 o'clock. The
calendar contains twenty-six prisoners, two of whom only are
charged with serious offences ; but the cause-list is consider-
able for this county, there being twenty-two causes, and five of
them special juries.
The following case has occurred this day :
(Before Mr. Justice WILLIAMS.)
CRIM. CON.--BUTTERTON V. BURGESS.
_ _

Mr. RICHARDS opened the pleadings, and
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD addressed the jury.—The plaintiff
was a farmer, living at Batchacre-hall, in this county. He
married his wife in 1816, who was the daughter of a respect-
able farmer in his neighbourhood, and brought him some little
fortune. They had a family of nine children. The plaintiff
took the defendant into his service as a bailiff. He was a per-
son of strict sanctimonious demeanour, and had thus an oppor-
tunity of insinuating himself into the good graces of the plain-
tiff's wife. Some reports were spread abroad relative to their
conduct, which came to the ears of the plaintiff, who taxed
his wife with it, but she so satisfied him at the time that the
plaintiff, believing the report to be a calumny, proceeded
against a person who had spoken against her. However, on
Lady-day last the plaintiff's wife went off with the defendant.
I do not call upon you, said the Learned Sergeant, to give
extravagant damages against the defendant, but I do expect
that you will give such a verdict as, may, as far as pecuniary
damages can, compensate the plaintiff for the loss he has sus-
tained in the seduction of a wife, the mother of his nine child-
ren, by one who had gained his confidence by the length of his
employment.
Richard Parr), Jones produced a copy of the marriage re-
gister from Adbaston, 19th February, 1816. Mrs. Butterton
was a Miss Yardley.
James Goodall,the plaintiff's uncle, stated that they lived to-
gether happily afterwards, and had nine children. She was a
steady woman in her manners.
Elizabeth Thursfield said that defendant was a servant in
the family for six years---a kind of bailiff. I don't know where
she is. She quitted the plaintiff in March. I saw her last in
November with her husband. I had heard of something wrong
before she went off. She is not quite 40. The defendant is
about her age.
Mary Bradborne.—l lived at Cheswardine. I am Mrs.
Butterton's aunt. She came to me at Lady-day, four miles
from her home, on Saturday. She went away on Monday,
returned on Tuesday, and went away again on Wednesday.
Defendant had lived nine or ten years in plaintiff's service as
a bailiff. Plaintiff has a large farm. Defendant called on
Wednesday. . .

Sarah Turner, plaintiff's nursemaid. Last year I went
with plaintiff's wife to Cheswardine, and then to an inn at
Drayton. Defendant was there. I can't tell where defend-
ant slept. He was in Mrs. Butterton's bed-room quite late
at bed time. I left him there with her and both the children.
We went to Almington. Burgess went with us. He said
one of the children should sleep with me, because he was so
tedious the other night they could do no nothing with it. I saw
the bed where Mrs. Butterton had slept. I could not tell
whether two persons had slept there or not. They went away
together in a chaise. Mrs. Butterton sent a message by a boy
to her husband.

By the JUDGE—There was not more than one bed in the
room at Drayton. I did not observe the bed next morning.
I don't know whether he had another bed-room or not. I live
with plaintiff now. Mrs. Butterton has never returned. Bur-
gess has not been there since.
John Felton—l served the writ on defendant on the 30th of
March, at a house near Newcastle. I told him I had a writ
against him at the suit of Mr. Butterton for seduction. He
replied, " lam very sorry that such a thing should happen ; it
is not my fault."
This was the case of the plaintiff; the defendant did not ap-
pear, the attorney not having delivered his brief in time.
Mr. Justice WILLIAMS expressed great doubt whether there
was sufficient evidence of the fact of adultery having been com-
mitted; whereupon the following letter from the defendant to
the plaintiff was then put in and read :

•
April 2.
" Sir,—As you have proceeded in an action against me of tres-
pass, I now proceed to state to you the reason of my conduct in
doing as I have. You first gave me encouragement for doing so,
by saying you would not be as I was, so much afeared of a woman,
and said that you had too much of one, and that I ought to assist
you. Secondly, after Mr. Yardley's death, you abused her so as
to cause me to interfere between you and she, so as to destroy the
peace of the family, and you have since openly declared that neither
of the last children were yours, and have since said that she is with
child with me, and have many times told her to go with me, and
have many times abused her ; and she could no longer stay, because
you caused her life to be in danger. Sir, it was not my desire to
cause you and her to part, neither knew I any thing of it until sho
sent me word that you was parted, and she had the two children
with her. When I knew that all had been caused through me I
was determined to go with her, let the result be what it would. I
was sorry to see you so hill-use her on the Friday before she left
you, by kicking her on the back, as since to cause her to miscarry.
She was so unwell she could not turn herself in bed. Sir, I have
taken a house and am now in Castle, and as your wife has got out
of pastur I consider it my duty to give her sheltur, and shall think
it right to do so as long as I have it in my power. I shall wait. the
result of a trial, if you like to proceed. I shall then more fully
state the cause. But if you like to meet me at Newport on next
Saturday send me word, and I will meet you at Mr. Stanley's. I
have no more to say as she is as well as she can be expected after
having had so bad a time of it.
" Your well-wisher at a distance,
" WILLIAM BURGESS."
Mr. Justice WILLIAMS then summed up the case to the Jury,
desiring them to say whether they were satisfied that the de-
fendant had had criminal intercourse with the plaintiff's wife.
The plaintiff ought to satisfy the Jury of the fact. They might
have called the chambermaids of the inns where they slept, or
it could have been shown that the plaintiff's wife was now
living with the defendant : however, he put it to Jury to de-
termine whether the letter amounted to an admission of the
fact. If they found that fact, they were to determine the da-
mages, though they had no very clear account of the case.
Verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 501.