The Sun.
London, England, 1857-04-24 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.-April

SHERIFFS' COURT.
(Before Mr. Under-Sheriff Burchell.)
BARING V. GORDON.-CRIM. CON.-DAMAGES, 3,0001.
This was a writ of inquiry to assess the damages
in an action brought in one of the superior courts
against the defendant for having had criminal con-
versation with the plaintiff's wife. judgment had
been suffered to go by default, and the defendant

did not now appear.
Mr. Bovill, Q.C., and Mr. Unthank appeared for
the plaintiff.
Mr. Unthank said the declaration set forth that
the defendant bad debauched the plaintiff's wife,
and the damages were estimated at 3,0001. The
plaintiff was William Frederick Baring, and the
defendant George Tomline Gordon.
Mr. Bovill then opened the case. He said it was
one of a very painful class—painful under any cir-
cumstances ; but he was glad to be able to inform
the jury that they would be spared from the most
distre=sing part of such an inquiry, the proof of the
fact alleged in the deelaraton, that the defendant
bad had criminal conversation with the plaintiff's
wife, for it was admitted by the defendant—indeed
it was beyond denial—aud the only question the
jury would have to dctermine was the amount of
damages the plaintiff-should recover under the cir-
cumstances which would be placed before them.
The plaintiff in th 3 action was a son of Mr. Henry
Baring, brother of Lord Ashburton, -and in 1845,
in November, he was married to a lady, then just
about of age, whose conduct was the subject of these
proceedings. She was the daughter of Sir Richard
Jenkins ; she had fortune and position, combined
with personal attractions, a refined intelligence, and
great accomplishments. They resided in Paris for
several years after their msrriage, and on returning
to, this country they lived at Guddford, from which
place they went in 1852 to reside at Eaton Hall,
near Retford, in Nottingham-hire. They had two
children—one a boy now about 11 years of age, the
other a girl about 8. After they bad settled in
Nottinghamshire they mixed in the best society of
the county, and visited and received visits from
the gentry of the vicinity of their residence,
and associated with many persons of rank and
station. The defendant resided at a short distance

from Eaton Hall, and was a person of some means
and position, holding the commission of a captain
in the Nottinghamshire Militia, or Sherwood Fo-
resters. An acquaintance sprung up between him
andthe plaintiff. Theyfrequenily visited each other.
They became most intimate friends, went out to-
gether to enjoy the sports of shooting and hunting,
&c., and visits were frequently exchanged between
Mrs. Baring and Mrs. Gordon. That was in 1852,
and such state of things continued down to Marc
in the present year. The plaintiff and bis wife hifl
always lived upon terms of the happiest endear-
ment, and iu the enjoyment of every comfort and
luxury, which affluence and station could give, un-
til the unhappy discovery was made which led to
these proceedings, which had destroyed a life of
happiness to Mr. Baring, had sent to ruin and dis-
grace a woman upon whom the least suspicion had
never fallen, and reduced her children to be per-
haps worse than orphans. In March the plaintiff
found that Captain Gordon, who had professed
so much friendship for him, had, whilst
enjoying his hospitality, seduced his wife. On the
11th of that month Capt. Gordon and Mrs. Baring
left Nottinghamshire and came to Lonalton together,
under circut-nsfancf s of the deepest distress, not
only to the plaintiff, but to Mrs. Gordon, who was
at that time in a condition which rendered the
matter a great deal more painful. In the greatest
agony of wind Mrs. Gordon went to a lady, named
Huntsman, a friend both of her and Mrs. Baring,
and with that lady she came to London. Mr.
Huntsman, who was a friend of the plaintiff, fol-
lowed them, and he and his wife and Mrs. Gordon
traced the defendant to the Great Western Hotel,
where he was taking breakfast with Mrs. Baring
when they arrived. Mrs. Baring rose from the
tahle, and when Mr. Huntsman went in he found
Mrs. Gordon in a fainting condition on her knees.
When he was appealed to he refused to leave Mn.s
Baring, and such was the shock to Mrs. Gordon
that it well-nigh proved fatal, she being then close
upon confinement. That adultery had taken place
had been admitted—there could -have been no an-
swer to that. Mrs. Baring went to her mother,
Lady Jenk,ns, and the jury would have to assess
the damages which Captain Gorden should pay for
the great wrong tie had done in destroying a life
of happiness which the plaintiff had been blessed
with. He could not conceive or suggest one single
circumstance palliative of Captain Gordon's con-
duct. Received into the Plaintiff's house as a
bosom fri-n.d, accompanying the plaintiff in shoot-
img excursions to Scotland and other place., he had
alloa:d the friendship with which he had been re-
garded, violated the generous hospitality which it
had b, en the plaintiff's pleasure to afford him ; he
had brought disgrace upon the plaintiff and his
faintly, broken up a happy life, and had sent this
unhappy lady to a position of infamy and disgrace.
No amount of damages could compensate a plain-
tiff in a case like this. The verdict of the jury was
sought, as they would have surmised, with a view
to ulterior proceedings, and he believed that had
not the damages been set at 3,0001., the jury would
readily have awarded more than that amount. Capt.
Gordon bad five children, and he repeated that he
could not reef anything whatever to palliate his con-
dust.
The certificate of the marriage, which took place
at Paris, was then put in, and also a settlement.
executed on the marriage of 8,0001.
Henry Huntsman examined—l reside at West
Retford Hall, Nottinghamshire, and have done so
some time. I was living there when the plaintiff
and his wife took possession of Eaton Hall as their
residence. This was in the autumn of 1852. Eaton
Hall is the plaintiff's present residence, and is
about two miles from mine. After their arrival,
myself and Mrs. Huntsman visited them, and the
intimacy wasmontinuedbetweenus and Mrs. Baring
'mil this distressing matter was known. Mr.
Baring, I should think, is about five or six and
thirty years of age. Mrs. Baring is somewhat
younger.. They have two children, a son and
daughter—one 11, and the other about 8 years of
age. They lived iu good style, and of course had
horses, carriages, and servants requisite for their
establishment. Captain and Mrs. Gordon lived
about 9 or 10 miles from Retford ; the two families,
Borings and Gordon-, were on terms of the closest
intimacy within a few months of Mr. Baring coming
there. Capt. Gordon is about 3i years of ags. They
have four children living, but have had m re. They
lived iu good society. Capt. Gordon was a huntii:g
man, and associated with the best society of thecoun-
ty. Mr. Baring and his wife alwayslived very hap-
pily together ; it seemed his pleasure togratify her in
any wish she might* express. He was extremely
attentive to her. He was once absent for six weeks
when he went to America; and once he went to Mar-
s file, t. meet his wife's sister on her way from India.
Iwt to see him off by the steamer for Amer:ca.
These were the only two occasions on which he was
alsent for any time. On the 11th of March a elm-
munication was made to me. Mrs. Gordon and
Mrs. Huntsman came to London by the express
train, and 1 fo'lowed them by a later train at 12
o'clock. At four in the morning I found thetu. at
the Great Northern Hotel. There had not been
the least possible suspicion of Mrs. Baring before
that time. , From inquiries I made of a porter, I
learnt that Capt. Gsrdon and Mrs. Baring ead gone
from the Great Northern Railway to the Great
Western Hotel. We went there, and having found
Capt. Gordon's room, Mrs. Gordon was ushered in
by a waiter. I remained outside with Mrs. Hunts-
man ; and after some lit,ie time I went in, when I
saw Mrs. Baring sitting bythe breakfast table. Capt.
Gordon was standing, with his wife on her knees be-
fore him in a fainting state. The scene was painful.
Mrs. Baring ro-e from the table when I went in. I
desired Mrs. Gordon to retire, as the excitement might
have been dangerous to one in her condition. Cap-
tain Gordon asked me to let him have five minutes
alone with his wife. Mrs. Baring walked out of
the room. At Mrs. Gordon's desire I consented to
her husband's request. In about twenty minutes I
went in, and found her again on her knees. It was
a most disrresirg scene. She was entreating him
to choose between the two. He refused to go home
with her. Sher ily afterwards he left the room,nay,
butaod
sent me a message that he was going away,
would give me his address, if I bad anything to
write to him about. I then took Mrs. Gordon back
to the Great Northern Hotel. Captain Gordon
visited her in her illnes'.
Edward Baring—l am one of the firm of Bering.
Brothers, and am brother of the plaintiff. I had
ample opportunity of seeing how he and his wife
lived, though, they were much in the country and
lin London. When I was in the country I was
Imo tly at my sister's, but I know that my brother
lived most happily with his wife, and he had not
the least doubt or suspicion of her until the dim-
very was made. ,
The Rev. John Twells—l am rector of Gam-
ston and vicar of Eaton, in Nottinghainshire. As
minister of the parish I knew me. and Mrs. Baring
very well—intimately. lam not married. I visited
at their house. There was not a shadow of suspicion
of Mrs. Baring's conduct until this matter was dis-
covered. Mr. and Mrs. Baring lived happily and
harmoniously together. lie was very indulgent,
polite, attentive, and considerate.
The Hon. J. Ashley—l have known Mr. and
Mrs. Baring about 4 years. I was in that county-
in 1853, 1855, and 1856, and visited them on inti-
mate terms. I also visited at Mrs. Baring's sister's.
The plaintiff and his wife lived On the very best
terms that could exist between man and wife.
Henry Milner—l am a banker. I know the par-
ties well, and until this wai discovered there could

not have been any susp'cion. They were most inti-
mate with the Gordous, and always lived happily
together.
Mr. Bovill said ho had other witnesses, but did
not think it was necessary to place further evidence
before the jury.
The learned Under-Sheriff told the jury that the
case was before them, and he should make but one
observation upon it. Evidence had been given as
to the terms upon which the plaintiff and bin-wife
had lived, but there had been no female witness
called, which usually was the case.
Mr. Bovill said he could call plenty. * •
The Under-Sheriff said he was not suggesting that
they should be called, but was merely noticing the
fact in putting the case to the jury. The witnesses
who had been examined unquestionably were men
of high honour and integrity. And with only one
remark to the jury upon the fact that no female
witness had been called, he should leave them to
say what damages the plaintiff should obtain. •
A juryman asked what were defendant's means ?
The Under-Sheriff said that was not necessary in
the consideration of what damages should be given
to the plaintiff for the wrong the "defendant bad
done him. The damages must be assessed irrespec-
tive of the defendant's means of payment. He
heard Lord Tenterden say that if a man could not
pay in purse he must in person.
A Juryman—But we may be doing an injury to
Mrs. Gordon and her children, who should not
suffer.
The Under-Sheriff—That is a very natural con-
sideration, but the only question here is, what da-
mages you will give the plaintiff upon the evidence
before you ?
The jury gave a verdict for 3,0001.