The Sun.
London, England, 1858-03-22 00:00:00

,the" •
ori
„Af.r. .416,114
;
•
- --$7,
,
(3015.* 74,
es r nti
_
j rlt

[P,ticat 41). SrAmpxD 511

LOLA MONTES AND THE YANKEE
COUNSEL.

The case at New York of "Jobson and Seely," lately
reported in our paper, in which Lola Montes was the
chief witness, ended it will be remembered, in a genera'
affray. It appears that a charge of contempt was ac-
cordingly ladged against them by the referee, and that
Judge Edmonds' way
appointed A 9 a second referee t
repor upon the hots in the new form. The principal
witness on this occasion was again Madame Lola Monies,
who was examined as follow, by Mr. Clinton :
Counsel—Did you see the commencement of the
affray ?
Lela Montes—l did.
Counsel—Be kind enough to state whether Mr. Ja-
son or Mr. Seely used the first violence. t
L da Montes—l saw the .-tick of Mr. Jobson descend
upon Mr. Seely. I advanced a little, thinking that be
would strike him. I then raw Mr. Seely ward the blow
of, and it fell on his shoulder from his head.
Counsel—The blow from the stick you mean ?
Lola Montes—Yee. I was apprehensive myself that
:here wou d be a dagger in it, and cried out "Take care,
Ur. Seely.
Counsel—Was the violence you have described the
fir-t violence between these parties that you saw ?
Lola Montes—l was quite close by them. I was
perfectly calm, not at all frightened, and I raw it
perfectly.
Mr. Schermerhorn—Speak kinder.
Lola Montes—l will speak load enough for you, I
warrant you.
Mr. Clinton—My question was whether the violence
you have described of the stick descending on Mr. Seely's
bead was the first violence that you saw between the
parties ?
Lola Montes— The first violence of Jobson against
Seely.
By the Court:—What occurred next ?
Lola 'Montes—Mi. Seeryivais Oneolde of the stove,
and Mr. Jobson standing at the (Aber. Mr. Seely was
verhiguietly writing, and this respectable gentleman
here Wis lawyer (Mr. Scheraierhorn), will questioning
me iron my testimony as to my•being a chambermaid,
and I was very quietly waiting till this persecution was
done. I saw then that Mr. Seely was quietly writing.
I looked at him and saw he was very calm. He rose,
turned his head to Mr. Whiting, and asked if this fellow
was to be allowed to go on in these unnecessary ques-
tions. Jobson rose up with an eye full of wickedneFs,
and lookod at Mr. Seely. "Fellow ! How dare you
call me afellow ?" I said to him, "You are nothing
hut a fellow !" You remember my saying that ? Mr.
Jobson then had risen. He then called me unutterable
names—names not for my utterance ; in facF, there was
one name that I did not understand till afterwards.
Referee—What was it ?

Lola Montes gave her notion of the word employed,
and was corrected by the referee, who informed her of
the proper orthoepy.
"Oh, shyster, is it ?" she said. "Excuse me. I did
not understand the word, That was all."

Referee—After Mr. Seely warded the blow off, what
happPned ?
Lola Montes—lt seemed to me that they both got
together a.gam. It seemed in my opinion justly that. I
remember perfectly the blow being given, and that I was
happy that the blow had not fallen on Mr. Seely%4 head,
where it was intended ; it fell here on bis shoulder ; then
I think JAson went a little farther forward and made a
grit, and they both grabbed together.
Referee--Now, Mr. Schermerhorn, go or. . _

Mr. Sohermerhorn —I. do not want to Eximine this
witness very nar.:h ; I only want to see how much exactly
she knows .d it.

GluNstl--Is your recollection very distinct about this
occurrence?

Lola Moutes—Yes ; I recollect you calling me Betsy
Watson.

Mr. S.--Never mind that. Just Rpeak cf the affair.
Never mind our a ,oversation. Do y.,u recollect dis-
ili,ctly whit ocourrBd ab ,ut this affarr

Montes—Ye., ; I recollect speaking to you about
it. You were very frightened—ah, you were very
frightened. I came up to you a.,,d I said, " T..ere, :ir,
is the consequence i f tour d it g l"
Mr. S. (uneasily)—Never mind t at—never mind that.
Lola Montes— ou asked me what you said. I spoke
to you, but you were awfully /rtghtened ; you were very
much annoyed.
Mr. S.—No, I ,-lon't think I was very much annoyed.
Now, did not Mr. Seely strike Jobson first on that
occasion ?

Lila Cdontes—l tol I you he did not.
Counsel—Will you swear, madam, that Jobion struck
Seely with a whip before any assault was made by Mr.
Seely on Mr. J.)bson ?
Lola 11ontee—I have sworn once, and that is quite
ufficient.

Mr. S.—l speak now of an assault, not of his being
struck. I ask you whether Mr. Jobson was not ae•
saulted first 1

Lola Montag —I do not know what you call an as-
but I think you made an assault on me all the
e.i—

Mr. an sssanit is raising the fiat to strike at a
person. If a man strikes at you he assaults you.
Montes—And what is the meaning of a=sault
and battery . .

Mr. S.—Assault and battery is both striking at and
hitting.
Lola Montes—Ab, that is it.
Mr. S.—Answer me that question, whether Seely
did not strike at Jobson before Jobson raised his whip
to strike him ?

Loll M )ntes—Mr. Seely was entirely cool ; so cool
hat I wa3 atonielled at bun.

Counsel—Well, now, that does not answer my clues-

Referee—She bae answered lon already.

Counsel—l think she has n, t

Ittferee—She La.. Sbe has said she did not Fee Mr.
Seely strike Mr. Jubson, but that the, first thing she
saw was Jobson in the act of striking Sltly
Lola Montes—Ob, I know how to manage Mr.
Schertnerhorn ; I have seen him before !
Couusel—l asked you wi,ethei• Mr. Seely bad not
assaulted Mr. Jobson before you saw Mr. Jobson strike
him with his whip ?
Lola Montes—And I asked yon the meaning of as-
sault and battery. I have never in all my life been
brought up for assault and battery.
Counsel—You are very fortunate that you bave not
been.

Lela Monteq—Ladies do not uae their hands to strike,
Counsel—Did you state where you saw Seely striking
Johson ?

Lula Montes—l did not say that I saw Saely striking
Jobson ; I saw Jobson striking Soi-ly.
Couns4 --Well, I ask you, then?
Lila Montes—Well, I say no.
Cuunie—Di.l you make use of this expression :
" Pummel him well ; I would like to see him pum-
melled ?"

Lola Montes—l never in my life made use of such an
uolvlylike,expression, and no witness will say that I
did ; I will tell you what I did say :—" Never mind
Slr. Seeley ; be is no: worth striaing by a gentle
man."

Referee—Oh, never mind that.
L is Montes—But he a.ked me, and I must tell what
I did say. ,
Counsel intimated that he had no further questions to
put, and the witness retired.
Judi!e EdmondF, in reporting to the Supreme Court,
gave his opinion that a contempt had been committed
before Mr. Referee Whiting, that Seely, though not the
aggressor, participated in the contempt by striking
Jobson a blow, that Jobson was rude and offensive, and
that he struck Seely. He reported, also, the modified
ap'logies to the court of both parties. The judge took
the report and affidavits of the counsel of Seely, which
state that Mr. Edmonds' (the referee's) report was par-
tial and unwarranted. He said the court would consi-
der Mr. Seely's case, bnt inasmuch as Jobson was not
an attorney of the court, it was a question whether it or
the referee (Hr. Whiting) should punish him.

THE EMPEROR OF FRANCE AND THE

LATE ORSINI.

[The following (says the Morning Advertiser) was, doubt-
less, originally intended for the columns of a well-known
weekly contemporary, but the accomplished author has
changed his intention, and transmitted it to us.]
Although we have not been so fortunate as to pro.
cure a copy of the penitential letter written to the
E nperor by Orsini, on the evening prior to his execu-
tion, we have been favoured with a transcript of his
Imperial Majesty's answer, which we lose no tame in
laying before our readers, because it redounds somuch
to the credit of the great potentate's well-kno muwn
candour and clemency :
" Had I listened only to the dictates of my heart and
conscience I should have gladly spared your life, which
must, however, be sacrified in deference to the wishes,
and in furtherance of the welfare, of my attached and
loyal subjects, to whom my august person and illustrious
dynasty are so justly and so generally dear. For my own
part, I cannot but acknowledge that, success constitutes the
chief distinction between the glorious enterprise of the
2d of December, 1851, end the detestable crime of the
14th January, 1858. Had my well-contrived plot miscar-
ried, I should have expiated my act, as you will yours to-
morrow, upon the scaffold. The number of innocent
Frenchmen whose blood was shed by my accomplices was
one hundred-fold greater than the amount of your victims,
I have encircled my brow with the diadem of despotism.
You have failed in bursting the fetters which I have
riveted in Italy, our common country. All the sove-
reigns and statesmen in Europe are my sycophants and
slaves, and whilst they laud my achievements to the skies,
because it prospered, have execrated yourw ,atitnemtphteheeicaesusoeef
it failed. And yet I cannot help now and then feeling
one
of that the liar's written a century ago, by -
of our greatest national dramatists, ill
some MifigUldqd
°Snia,
del
,eplor edjriaoladsi
C:ro
edn moralists, a
ap-
propriate on my lips than on yours— 1)- ear more
qEuanloeliortal;:isoc°ll(l°
M" isoeroriam rar
SSi reo di questo escgtcuoesai inod,i
oorftrirbile i geloinalitor utain
stesso !'
(Metaaasio.)
• • "N AP OLEON '