The Sun.
London, England, 1859-04-21 00:00:00

BAIL COURT.

(Before Mr. Justice Wightman and a Common Jury.)
WEBB V. WILLES—SEDUCTION.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff, a widow
lady, named Webb, against the defendant for the seduction
of her daughter. Mr. Edwin James, Q.C., Mr. Hawkins,
Q.C., and Mr. Henry James appeared for Webb, and Mr.
Montague Chambers, Q.C., and another learned gentleman
appeared for Willes.
Mr. Edwin James, in opening the case, said the present
action was brought by the plaintiff, a widow lady named
Webb, residing at Lockridge, against the defendant
Willes, a person residing at Marlborough, carrying
on an extensive business as a maltster and baker,
for the seduction of her daughter. The unforturtate young
lady, the person most deeply interested in the present pro-
ceedings, was about 24 years of age, and the defendant was
about 14 years older than Miss Webb. The acquaintance
between the parties first commenced in the year 1851, when
the daughter of the plaintiff first went to visit Mr. Henry
Willes, a fanner, at Whitfield, and a cousin of 'Mr. Sidney
Wines, the defendant. The acquaintance was continued,
and in the year 1856 it was supposed that the
defendant was' paying his addresses to Miss Webb
for the purpose of marriage. In the year 1858
the marriage had not taken place, and in Septem-
ber of that year the plaintiff's daughter was delivered of a
child. The learned gentleman then read a letter addressed
by Miss Webb to the defendant, a short time previous to
the birth of the child, in which she implored him to save
her from disgrace and misery by performing his promise of
marriage. No answer had been returned to that letter,
and he (Mr. James) vas utterly at a loss to imagine
what defence could be set up by the defendant. Moralists
had of late talked much about the "social evil," but such
cases as the present tended to increase that calamity, and it
was the duty of jurors to stop, by their verdicts, the evil, as
far as it was possible.
The first witness called was

shire.
ea,
Mrs. Jane Webb, who said—l am the plaintiff in this
twenty-four and twenty-five. I knew a Mr. Henry
I a he ahvoe e
Ogbourne,
vo
ueldir
no
now
1, eib. rnee
tlabout
Willes, a farmer, residing there. He was the
an
Ir "halvlrneeslaiBdsed leautlgLhi eac k r irs living.Md gaer. Mary
cousin of Mr. Sidney Willes, the defendant. In 1851 my
daughter went on a visit to Mr. Henry Willes, and conse-
quently made the acquaintance of Mr. Sidney Willes. In
about 1853 or 1854 I removed to Lockridge, about three
miles from Marlborough ; and while living there my
daughter frequently visited Mr. Henry Willes, and saw
Mr. Sidney Willes. I saw Sidney Wiles at my residence
about three times after that. He was paying his ad-
dresses to my daughter. It was about 12 months after I
went to Lockridge. I first saw him there when he came to
tel me of a situation for my son. After that he paid
another visit to Ogbourne. I dealt with him for bread,
and my daughter used to go to Marlborough for it. My
daughter was delivered of a child in September, 1858. I
first became aware that she was enciente in April. Shortly
after finding that my daughter.was in that condition she
quitted Lockridge and went to Mr. Henry Willes, at Whit-
field, and afterwards removed to Wroughton, near Swin-
don. She afterwards went to Wadsworth, where she
was confined in September last. The child is still
living. I paid the expenses of the accouchment, and ever
since then I have had to maintain my daughter and her
infant. She has never lived at home since that time.
Cross-examined by Mr. Montague Chambers—My
daughter was 24 last January. lam not sure, however,
that she was not 25.

Mr. Justice Wightman—Don't you know the age of your
daughter ?
Witness—Not exactly.
Cross-examination continued--My daughter first went
to visit Mr. Willes, the cousin of the defendant, in 1851. She
went frequently. She used to act as my housekeeper.
After my daughter had ordered the bread one of the defen-
dant's men brought it home. The first time I saw Sidney
Wines was when he came to tell me about the situation for
my son. He supped on one occasion at my house about
two years ago. I have known my daughter to return home
from Marlborough as Into as eleven o'clock at night, but
on occasions when she came from Whitefield she was later.
I generally sent her to order the bread of an afternoon and
she used to return between 10 and 11 in the evening. I used
to sit up for her. She generally returned home alone.
Re-examined by Mr. Hawkins—l always asked her
when she returned, what kept her so late, and I always got
a satisfactory answer. I have a small property of my own,
enough to support me.

Mary Webb—l am the daughter of the plaintiff in this
action. I was 24 last January. In 1851 I became ac-
quainted with Mr. and Mrs. Henry Willes. On the New-
Year's Day of the year following I met the defendant,
Sidney Willes. Between that time and March, 1852, I
met bim there frequently.
At this point of the case an arrangement was proposed,
and it having been assented to, a verdict for the plaintiff,
with £250 damages, was taken by consent of all parties.