The Sun.
London, England, 1832-06-22 00:00:00

THE KIND V. MART HAYWARD.

This case was precisely similar to the preceding, and of
course open to the same objection. No evidence being
offered, the defendant was acquitted.

COMMON PLEAS.-(THIS DAY.)

CRUM. CON. -...GILIES V. GALE.

This was an action brought against the defendant, to
recover compensation in damages, for criminal conversa-
tion with the plaintiff's wife.
Mr. HOLT stated the case to the Jury. The plaintiff
was a gentleman of the name of Giles, and the defendant
was a Mr. Charles James Gale, a young gentleman, a special
pleader, and whom he believed had recently been called to
the bar by the Hon. Society of the Inner Temple, and
the present action was brought to recover a compensation
in damages for one of the severest injuries that one man
could inflict upon another,—namely, that of depriving a
husband of the virtue, comfort, and society of his wife.
Having said thus much, he, Mr. Holt, would lay before
them the circumstances of the case, which he expected he
should be able to establish by evidence. The plaintiff is
the natural son of a gentleman of great respectability
and wealth, residing in Shropshire, and is the High
Sheriff of that county. In the year 1E419, in the course
of his pursuits in the city, he fell into the company of his
present wife, a lady of very considerable beauty and accom-
plishments, and then only about 16 years of age—her name
was Emma Neale, the daughter of a most respectable jew-
eller, then carrying on business in Sweeting's-alley, Corn.
bill. After elapse of a short time, young Giles was received
into the bosom of the young lady's family as her intended
husband. Their courtship continued for upwards of
three years, and in the month of May, 1921, be
married her without a fraction. Mr. Neale, senior,
now proposed that they should remove to St.
James's-street, where they opened again in the
jewellery business. They continued to live to-
gether up to the beginning of last year, when, in conse-
quence of ill health, Mr. Giles was advised by his medi-
cal attendant to a change of air, and he took a cottage
on the Harrow road during the summer months.
He removed Mrs. Giles and his family to his new resi-
dence, but scarcely had they slept one night there when
Mrs. G. absconded, leaving her children totally unpro-
tected. He (the Learned Counsel) need not describe the
feelings of his client at the discovery of the absence
of his wife, and he lost no time in endeavouring
to trace out her retreat. At length, after some days had
elapsed, he received information that she had taken up her
abode at the chambers of a young man in the Temple, a
special pleader. His client immediately set out with two
friends to the place to which he had been directed to claim
his wife, and on reaching the chambers of the defendant he
demanded her restoration. At this time he should be
able to prove satisfactorily that the lady was concealed un-
der the defendant's bed, although he (the defendant) posi-
tively asserted she was not there. An angry explanation
took place between the parties, in the course of which the
defendant said he had met the lady in the street casually,
and that he considered her " fair game," and that he
had taken her a " prize" to his chambers. Defendant
telling the injured husband such a gross falsehood, he
(the plaintiff) told him he lied, and said "only give me
back my wife, let her come home with me and I will
trouble you no further." However, the defendant re-
fused, and his client determined upon regaining her
by force, watched about the Temple gates for night
after night, when he saw them come out arm in arm. He
seized her immediately by the hand, and called assistance ;
but the wife refused to leave the protection of the de-
fendant, and, after a lapse of some time, they walked
off together. These were the facts of the case, and
he (Mr. Holt) felt convinced, if he proved a criminal
intercourse between the parties, he should receive at the
hands of the Jury that reparation which such an insult to
the feelings of his client merited.
Mr. Charles Humphries, the parish-clerk of St. Ann's,
Soho, proved the marriage of the parties at that church by
bans on the 7th of May, 1821.
The case was proceeding when our reporter left.

The Duke of SUSSEX was in the House of
Lords last night, and appeared in good health.
ELECTIONEERING.—The Reform Bill having
at length become law, it will be observed that some of
those gentlemen who intend offering their services as re-
presentatives at the next election are on the move. L. W.
DILLWYN, Esq., of Penllergare, offers himself as the addi.
tional Member for Glamorganshire, and J. H. VIVIAN,
Esq., of Singleton Abbey, for the new borough of Swansea.
Both are well known to be reformers and friends of
economy. Merthyr-Tydvill will, no doubt, be repre-
sented by Mr. GUEST, who, when in Parliament,
was " a good man and true" to every measure of
retrenchment in the national expenditure. LLOYD V.
WATYINs, Esq., has declared himself a candidate
to represent the borough of Brecon, in opposition to
CHARLES Miami/of, Esq., the present Member. Both
have canvassed the borough, and a contest seems inevitable.
A gentleman, who has favoured us with a letter from
town, dated Wednesday evening last, says :—" It is gene •
rally understood that the House of Commons will get
through their business, so as to adjourn, by July the 10th;
and as soon as the House of Lords can finish theirs, that
Parliament will be prorogued, to meet no more. Mini-
sters, I believe, wish for a new election in November ;
but it is considered very doubtful whether the electoral
lists and other machinery can be got ready so soon, and
whether it must not be deferred till early in spring."—
Cambrian.