The Sun.
London, England, 1861-03-05 00:00:00

(......t.:,..j,,,,,71,,,1;21%..,,‘.,;:,.,,t,117,
.• . ,
, ,
.., • ~..
~... ~,
/;
,ii.,._24,41 ~ - ~,4,4-,,.. ,r ! .
71.11 ;; , -----''' ------77
. 0 imik
~,,,,, 47 art •fit)
,te-,-7 '24 A.,, _,A7
ez.,,_,_c„e_____ .* TI AND MUSIC ,
.4*ft?,.;?,.V -
.... , .
.1.- ;6.i.:
:i -i i ~,,,' , (
. . ,
t o, 4
ui , :..,..
~.2441‘...,,,,, ....../- ,,,.,,,,,,,„.,.",
...._.
...
....
.......... un.. ~.
..„,...„ 0; „L., C i:i U, Yesterday the Lambeth Police7cou itc48.7441!-ACg.351717:/4,:e:`,
' r* ' 6‘al_—_—t "
~,,
~,,.., . 440/144,: r ,
~-,A.. ,w, .// 1
, ,44 __ L.
Lekiik
41- t,, (34.74, - . _ - 6,1 --
,4) At 1 .--.7 • ~...,,
.._,.
~-., ~, ,,,_,....,.....„ I., ,
~,,,,, ,
. -.'
'Y
... 1“;;a . 1 ..::: :' ''
densely crowded with an audience,
_lnpn k:,.,,,, ..y
..t.,.. 0,, A ,
r:rt,• ",". ' ,-- ' '..--L,-.o'';'-''s (' 49,,-4\t-‘,./ '44)/1-1, -'`"?'':. -I'..l''.''►l'-'l' ./ 47,4.../4\nl‘::':+ \ll-4°-:,!'H'''',4,ll'i—'l'—f..:s' ''''';'1;0111111tr. "'''74'`'," Ni. -4
. -`4l'-z,' 'll''''l
„ connecteli,iwift
....... ~ j ik ~,..._-...,..

at Galata he formed the idea of making her his
mistress. If this was his design, it WES not her
design that it should be so. Look to his conduct
snbsequently. He wishes still to obtain her. He
is found with her at Edinburgh—he is found with
her in Rostrevor Chisreh. I ask On do •ou helleVe
he obtained the grand object of his desire—that he
gained possession of her person, the mystery and
great secret of her life ?—that he becsme her
tyrant? Do you believe if he had that .he would
then have gone to that chttreh and put himself into
the predicament in which he stands to-day by
becoming her wedded husband !' Do you believe
this man, who has been represented to you by his
counsel as from the first a skilful seducer ? IJo
you believe that man who planned her ruin, who
minded it earnestly for a lout; period of time P--
the than of faslaioit and gaiety, who looks upon
the great crime of seduction as one of various de-
grees, holding that nobility stands high, that
intellect and education is to be only in the middle
rank, and that id the latter ease the offence is
very venial ? Do you believe that this man, if he
could have gained his object with the woman he
admired, that he would ever have married her in
the church at Rostrevor? Impossible. But, in
order to show the value of her testimony, I pass
over what he says happened in Edinburgh and in
the Leith steamer. The one statement is con-
tradicted by his own affidavit; the other by
decency and all that has happened in the
case. Do you believe a word of that state-
ment ? What do they prove about Waterford ?
Nothing. They get a copy of a bill at Cummins's
Hotel. The proprietor 'was here, and we were
prevented from going into that matter. We know
the defendant did everything ho could to get
proof of what he wanted, and has failed. He failed
in Thomastown—he failedin Newry, and he failed
in Malahide. They produced a bill from Rostre-
vor, dated the 15th, of a party leaving on the 15th,
whereas they were only married on the 15th, and
did not quit the hotel until the 18th. There is not
a solitary fact in the case established against her.
" But," says the defendant, "you artful woman,
you temptress, you enchantress, why did you dare
to send anybody round to the different hotels to
ascertain what could be proved against you ?" Who
is it that puts that question ? The defendant. And
what 'is he detected in having done ? He cut off a
lock of hair from the head of a child seven years
old that he thought was like the hair of the head
of the woman he had deserted, and that he intended
to marry and not to marry—that he marries and
tries to unmarry. He gets a piece of a gown that
she had once upon her, as he represents in Thoinas-
town, and armed with a lock of hair and a piece of
that gown, he procures a witness, and shows them
to her. It was not the hair of his wife. The piece
of dress may, or may not, have been the dress of
this injured woman, and he ventures to fabricate
evidence to destroy her character as he had
destroyed her happiness. This was discovered by
accident. We knew it not. Until the lady started
up in the witness-box and told the story of the lock
of hair her counsel had not heard it. Then we
ascertained the history of the transaction. The
woman was telegraphed for who could prove it.
She came, and now that she has arrived you are
asked not to believe her. What would be your
feelings if, sitting on a case of the life or death of
a fellow creature, Sergeant Armstrong spoke of
murder and trialti for murder, what would be your
feelings of any party sentencing to death a fellow-
creature on the evidence of Bridget Cole and the
other witnesses ? And in like manner I put
it to you, honour and virtue are as dear as liberty
and life. Honour to a woman is dearer than life.
Why should you rob her of that which is all that
is left to her, upon the rotten testimony which has
been concocted against her ? (Applause.) When
they ask why we ventured to do what we have done,
I say because we found what was fabricating against
us ; and that young woman that gave that evidence
told you the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,
and she has demonstrated that what was sworn by
Biddy Cole, and that other woman, was entirely
and absolutely false. What, therefore, becomes of
that portion of the ease P. It's vanished, it's gone.
What's the remainder of this case, or this corres-
pondence—l "mean, my lord, and I pray your at-
tention to it—the correspondence read by my
learned friend, Sergeant Sullivan,who, like a lawyer,
commenced where he ought to commence, and gave
the correspondence from the day of the marriage to
the closing scene, that took place in Leith. What
is it ? Every line of it the correspondence of mar-
ried people. Love and anxiety on his part ; on her
part a statement of all the difficulties and embar-
rassments to which, as his wife, she was subject in
that distant country. Letters addressed to her as
his wife—letters addressed by her to him as her
husband. The thing is clear, intelligible, distinct ;
until at last there is one letter glided over by Ser-
geant Armstrong, which I shall call the Christmas-
day letter, in which I beseech you, if there be any
of you that has a doubt on your mind that there
was a secret lawful marriage, to hear what Major
Yelverton has written upon the subject himself. In
a previous letter he has said—" You must not be so
low-spirited. -What is the necessity for letting it
explode. Can you go abroad ? I have every reason
to believe that next June will see you through the
scrape; but more when we meet." Nobody can deny
that that exactly tallies with the date of the mar-
riage. Then the letter of Christmas-day, 1857 :
" Carissima mia—l fear it is not reservation of bon-
bons that havd caused my silence this time,but what
you wrote in your last letter but one." Not pro-
duced. Where is that letter ? " You say—' I
told you my resolution in case certain events did
occur. You were very angry, but it would be
my duty, and if I live I must do it.' "
That's a quotation from her letter—l wish we had
the whole of it. " / told you," she wrote, " it would
be my duty, and I must do it." He then resumes
—" Now, the fact is, that it is not a question of
mere anger on my part, but your resolution is
founded on false views, -Where is your duty of
keeping faith with me? I have never intentionally
deceived you, and have done more than I promised,
at great risk." That is the ceremony, I call on you
to believe, performed within the walls of that chapel
at Rostrevor. " I told you the event we fear could
be avoided"—that's a very ugly allusion—" and you
certainly cannot doubt that it is equally unwelcome
to me as it can be to you ' • but if the future proves
that I-have been deceived by others that will not
absolve you from your faith, the which if you break
with me, you will never from that moment have
one of even tolerable content during the rest of your
life. If you do feel any love for me you must change
that resolution. If I depart this life you may speak ;
or if you do you may leave a legacy of the facts;
but whilst we both live you must trust me, and I
must trust you. If I feel my trust misplaced', if you
have any affection for me, I do not envy you the
future. Your duty lies this way, not that." What
does that letter mean ? I usk you, gentlemen, what
does it mean ? It means this :—" I, your inexor-
able master, warn you that you must not disclose
that marriage. I care not for the birth of the child.
Secrecy is the bond, no matter how you are exposed.
I have made a sacrifice for you, and whatever may
be your feelings as a gentlewoman and as a mother,
you must endure the disgrace, or else I threaten
you—l terrify you by the denunciation that you
shall never have one happy hour for the rest of your
life." What's the argument made by his counsel ?
That from the day he was at Galata he was her de-
liberate, skilful, and scientific seducer. Thus, says
the defendant, I have added hypocrisy to profanity,
to deception blasphemy; 'lam not bound to pay
for the sustenance of this woman ; I am not her
wedded husband; I stand before you her profli-
gate and unprincipled seducer. I found her young,
I found her virtuous. Where is she'now ? Her
innocence changed—her virtue lost—her beauty
spoiled—the hopes of her life fled for ever ! Better
the hand of death had swept her into an early
grave ; it would have been consecrated by the tears
of maternal affection—gentle tears, recalling happy
memories of the past, sweetened by blessed hopes
of a bright immortal future. He has blasted her
happiness in this life—he has endangered it in the
life to come, according to his argument. Save him
from the consequences of that argument, and do not
brand him as his counsel did, as a scientific, delibe-
rate, unprincipled seducer. How stands the ques-
tion now ss ith the whole of this great trial before
you ?—now that you have all the facts ; and I
cannot dwell at this hour minutely upon t hose
particular circumstances that I might, if I had
gained you at an earlier hour of the day, have
endeavoured to reason upon step by step ? I ask
you to judge of that woman as she has appeared
before you, and then to say do you believe her.
Trace her life up from the first hour spent within
the walls of the convent until that terrible day
when she stood in that box to tell the story of her
multitudinous sorrows. Ask yourselves what fact
has been proved against her with any living man
save this defendant. Her crime is, she loved him
too dearly and too well. If she had millions she
would have flung them at his feet. Had she a
throne to give, she would have placed him onithat
throne. All she had to give was her heart—she
made him the, sovereign of her affections—and
there he reigned with undisputed sway. What are
those affections ? They have been planted in our

nature lay th7Almighty. tiekve survived. the
fall, to repair the ravages of sin and death. They
dignify, exalt, and inspire our existence here
helot, Which else is cold! monotonous, and dark.
Nor may We belieVe their use terminates by, the
diSsolntiOn df thdt inystetions unionlletNteeil sent
and body. Here may we hope that the
high affections, purified, spiritualised, inithotta::
lised, become a portion of the -bliss- unspeakable
rceerVed for the spirit of the just made perfect
through the Countless ages Of eternity. (Cheers.)
She gave him her affections. She gave
him that love—a woman's love. Who can fathom
its depths—who can
_measure its intensity—who
can describe its deVotion She tells you herself
what that love was—" If you were to be eieented
as a convict I would stand beneath the gallows."
And if he had taken that Wcitnan for his wife misery
would have endeared him to her. In poverty she
would have served him=from sickness and misfor-
tune she would never have tied--she Wotild have
been his constant companion, his guide, his friend
—his polluted mistress, never ! Therefore, now I
call on you to do justice to that injured woman.
You cannot restore her to the husband she adored,
or the happiness she enjoyed—you cannot give
colour to that faded cheek, or lustre to the eye that
has been- dimmed by many a tear—lou cannot re-
lieve the sorrows of her bursting heart, but you
may restore her to her place in society. You may,
by your verdict, enable her say—" Rash I have
been, indiscreet I may have been through the ex-
cess of my affection for you, but guilty never."
You may replace her in the ranks which she would
never disgrace; you may restore her to that
society, in which she was qualified to shine and has
ever adorned. To you I commit this great case.
Would to God I had talents or physical energy to
exert either or both longer on the part of this in-
jured and insulted woman. She finds an advocate
'in you. She finds it in the respected judge on the
bench. She finds it in every heart that beats
within this court and in every honest man through-
out the country: (Loud cheering, and waving of
hats in the gallery, which lasted several minutes,
and could not be repressed notwithstanding the in-
terposition of the Chief Justice.)
The court was then adjourned.
DUBLIN, MONDAY, 5 p.m.
The case was resumed this morning. The Lord
Chief Justice took his seat at 10 o'clock, and imme-
diately commenced his charge to the jury. He has
read a great deal of the correspondence tending to
show that the lady never contemplated any other
relationship with the defendant than that of mar-
riage. His lordship is still proceeding, but is ex-
pected to conclude shortly.
DUBLIN, 6.30.
THE VERDICT.

His lordship concluded his charge at 6 o'clock.
The jury having returned into court at twenty
minutes past 6 p.m., in answer to the Chief Justice
stated—first, they had found the Scotch marriage a
valid one ; and secondly, that there was a good Irish
marriage. The Chief Justice asked them if they
found that defendant was a Roman Catholic, to
which they replied that they had.
On the announcement of the verdict the excite-
ment of the audience burst into applause, which
was continued for a short time, and which was taken
up by the immense crowds outside the courts and
along the quay.
On,the verdict being made known to the thou-
sands of people who were congregated on Inns
Quay, and who lined the sides of the river for a con-
siderable distance, they took up the cheers of those
within the roar Courts, and the enthusiasm was
most vehement.

The scene in court was beyond all description.
Mrs. Yelverton was in one of the chambers of the
court. The horses of the carriage waiting for her
were taken from it by the crowd, in order that they
might draw her to the hotel where she is staying.
The case is the great topic of discussion throughout
the city.

One of the most remarkable effects of the Yelver-
ton marriage case is the extraordinary demand for
newspapers. It was quite impossible to supply
this demand in Dublin. The printing machines
were kept at work almost incessantly, and yet the
papers were sold at a premium. The newsvenders
had a regular harvest, penny papers being sold by
them readily for 6d., and in some instances they
got a shilling a copy. The Daily Express the
only daily with a double sheet, was specially in
demand. This journal devotes 25 columns this
morning to a report of Saturday's proceedings,
which consisted only of the two speeches on evi-
dence by Sergeant Armstrong and Mr. Whiteside.
To the eloquent speech of the latter gentleman the
Express devotes 17 columns. The Freeman gives
him 11 coluMns, publishing a supplement for the
purpose.

(From the Times.)

We direct attention to the extraordinary cause
which has just been tried in the Dublin law courts,
much less on account of its strange incidents than
because it illustrates with striking clearness the
uncertainty of our law as it bears on the gravest of
social relations. The facts of the case of " Thelw all
v. Yelverton," so far as regards their general inte-
rest, may be detailed in a few sentences, though a
judge remarkable for acuteness and despatch was
engaged nearly a fortnight in bearing them, and, as
given from the lips of the actual witnesses, they
seem to have formed the most moving of dramas.
The action was brought by the nominal plaintiff
against the Hon. William Charles Yelverton, the
heir to the Irish peerage of Avonmore, and a
Brevet-Major in the Royal Artillery, for the pur-
pose of trying before a jury whether Major Yelver-
ton, who in June, 1858, had contracted marriage
with a lady in Scotland, had not previously married
another lady, then named Maria Theresa Long-
worth, who, of course, was the real complainant.
We should add, perhaps, that the present action
was incidental to a formal suit, now pending before
a Scotch tribunal, with the view of settling the
same question, but in which the parties interested
in the issue can only proceed upon written testi-
mony.

grAmpED, SD.

I service, and declared tits t they
were husband and
wife; no witness, however, was present at the act,
althoUgh it was immediately communicated by her
to her companion. She admits, moreover, that
whatever was the rite, it Nl'o not followed by the
consequences. of marriage ; and that, though she
conceived it a legal obligation, she declined to live
with Major Yelverton as hig wife until married in
a Catholic plaCe of worship. All this Yelverton
peremptorily contradicts, insisting that an illicit
connection had been formed at Edinburgh at this
petted. Events followed in quick succession which
have led to a Most unfortunate issue. At the close
of July 1857, Miss Long WW.th met Major Yelverton
at Waterford for the, purpose, accorjing toiler state-
ment, of clothing the quasi-nuptials in fficiolland
with the surictity of a Roman Catholic ceremony.
A difficulty arose respecting a dispensation for the
non-publication of b ins between the parties, and
the pair travelled towards the north of Ireland,
through Thomastown, -IVlalahide, and Newry, until,
upon the 18th-of August, they were privately mar-
ried by a Roman Catholic priest in the neighbour-
hood of Rostrevor. With one very important excep-
tion, to which- we shall hereafter recur, there is
little difference in the evidence on either side so far
as regards this marriage ceremony; and it must be
taken that these persons were united, according to
the forms of the Church of Rome, in a solemn though
a scarcely regular manner. From this time forward
both agree that they lived together as man and wife ;
the lady, however, positively declaring that, until
after the Roman Catholic marriage, there had been
no cohabitation, but Mr. Yelverton pledging his
oath that they had cohabited during all the course
of the previous fortnight, and further, that his only
intention in going through the rite at Rostrevor was
to ease the conscience of a scrupulous paramour.
Some months were spent in this curious connexion.
The lady, bearing the gentleman's name, was intro-
duced to her friends in Scotland, and received ap-
parently the status of a wife ; she was regularly
described as Mrs. Yelverton in a- Scotch hotel-book
and a French passport ; and at length, early in
1858, the pair found themselves in lodgings at Bor-
deaux' where Yelverton soon thought fit to leave
her. Before this time some differences had sprung
up. The lady, believing herself enciente, insisted
upon an avowal of the marriage, while Yelverton,
putting her off, was writing about "keeping the cat
in the bag," and "trying to avoid the event which
they dreaded." As might have been expected,
misery ensued; the unhappy woman, fearing her
danger, not knowing what to do, and already aban-
doned, wrote passionate letters of anguish to Yel-
verton, in which she evidently addressed him as a
husband. By this time she had managed to obtain
a certificate of her marriage in Ireland, and she
reached Scotland only to hear of Yelverton's union
with another person. She; refused with scorn an.
insulting offer to take a refuge, " perhaps in New
Zealand ; ' commenced proceedings for bigamy
against Yelverton, which have been followed by the
suit in Scotland; and now, for the first. time, the
whole story has been. brought to light in a court o
justice.

Such is an outline of this extraordinary case, and
in weighing the evidence on-either side it is difficult
to pronounce a judgment. There are some impro-
babilities in the lady's story, especially as regards the
alleged Scotch marriage; but on this and-other im-
portant points she was well corroborated by facts
and witnesses, and during a long and severe exami-
nation she was not shaken in a single particular.
In finding for her the jury have probably come to
a sound conclusion, though their verdict can have
no effect on the principal point in issue. On
the other hand the case of Yelverton was obvi-
ously antecedently improbable, and that in a
very remarkable degree. It rested in the main on
his own statements, with every possible motive
for falsehood ; and it broke down in its vital point,
—the assertion of a cohabitation for a fortnight
before the marriage in Ireland. As regards the
actors in this woeful drama, it is easy to form an
estimate of them. The man who, in his own words,
conceived " the idea" of a systematic seduction—
committed, if we may credit himself, a most abomi-
nable outrage on a lady who had just been the
guest of his superior officer—profaned a solemn and
most holy rite for the vile purpose of fraud and
sensuality—abandoned his victim in the hour of
her peril, with hints about " avoiding an event"
which may well bear a teri ible interpretation—and
finally crowned the climax of his deeds by ruining,
through his contact, another • woman—we may
leave to his self-inflicted misery. With his own
counsel, we simply give him up, and can only sup-
pose, in the public interest, that his name will
soon disappear from the Army List. Mit what
shall we write about his partner in this dark his-
tory of folly, and ruin, who now floats a wreck on a
sea of misfortunes by reason, in part of her own
failings, and whose very success must cause her
the keenest anguish ? We may lament her wrongs
and sufferings, but cannot conceal from ourselves
the fact that they principally arise from her mis-
conduct. Let us take it that she was technically
chaste, and that she never cohabited with Yelver-
ton till after the secret marriage in Ireland. But
was her behaviour, even from the first, in accord-
ance with feminine propriety, and is it not plain
that through all these years it was she who was
really following Yelverton, not Yelverton who was
seeking her in marriage? This, indeed, is the only
possible plea which can be urged in excuse of his
misdeeds.

The worst feature in this case, however, so far as
regards the public interests, is its illustration of
our law respecting marriage in these kingdoms.
Had anything like an intelligible principle, or
even a rule of equal justice, pervaded this part
of our jurisprudence, we may be assured that
this odious case would never have taken its present
shape. It is scarcely possible for any one to define
what acts constitute a marriage in Scotland, and
this uncertainty in the present case was the pro-
bable cause of all that has followed, and, doubtless,
will often again entail the most painful conse-
quences on families. As regards the law of mar-
riage in Ireland, its gross injustice is broadly shown
in the circumstance of the secret ceremony which
took place in the chapel near Rostrevor. There is
no doubt that on that occasion a valid Roman
Catholic marriage was celebrated, had both the
parties been of that faith ; and it is truly monstrous
that in a country like Ireland any question as to
the validity of the contract should be made to turn
on the creed of the contractors. An old Irish statute
however avoids all marriages celebrated by "Popish
priests between a Papist and any person who hath
been, or hath professed him or herself to be, a Pro-
testant at any time within twelve calendar months
before such celebration of marriage ;" and as Miss
Longworth was confessedly a Roman Catholic,
while Yelverton claims to have been a Protestant,
the effect of the act has been pleaded in his favour.
The evidence of the matter of fact was very con-
flicting at the trial ; and, although the verdict has
been pronounced, we apprehend that the point of
law remains open for discussion. It is needless to
dwell on the cruel litigation which will probably
arise, as regards both the Scotch and the Irish
marriages, in Scotland, Ireland, and before the
House
,of Lords, and which for years will leave
in uncertainty the social status of all the parties.
'But is it not a disgrace that our legal system in
o parts of the empire of Great Britain should
leave the most important of contracts a matter
entirely incapable of definition, or hazarded on a
collateral fact which may be entirely unknown to
one party, and should thereby offer an obvious
premium to fraud, crime, and perfidious villany in
the most responsible of social engagements

It appears that in August, 1852, William Charles
Yelverton and Maria Theresa Longworth became
acquainted by mere accident upon the passage from
Boulogne to London. The gentleman was in his
28th year, and the lady, if we may judge from her
letters and from the interest her appearance has
excited, must have been attractive, and even fasci-
nating. The night was passed by the pair on deck,
a plaid forming their common protection ; and the
following day Major Yelverton found himself the
visitor of a relation of Miss Longworth, and spend-
ing some hours in that lady's society. A few months
afterwards a letter from Miss Longworth, addressed
to her cousin in Albania, but sent with " a formal
note" to Major Yelverton,'who was asked to post
it at Malta, where he was quartered, induced
a renewal of the acquaintance ; and from this
time till the autumn of 1855 these two young
persons corresponded with each other, without,
however, any actual meeting. The tone of the cor-
respondence is peculiar—a mixture of gossip and
badinage, indicating great ability, but not too much
delicacy or feeling, in the lady. In 1855 Miss
Longworth, being a Roman Catholic, undertook the
duties of a Sister of Mercy in a French convent at
Constantinople, having previously been made ac-
quainted with the fact that Major Yelverton was in
the Crimea, and engaged on service in the British
army. At this convent a lengthened interview
took place, at which, according to her version, the
gentleman made an offer of marriage, and, accord-
ing to his, " he formed the idea of making Theresa
Longworth his mistress." The scene shifts to the
camp in the Crimea, and there some further love
passages occurred, while the lady was under the
care of the wife of a general of brigade, who must
have remarked Major Yelverton's advances, and of
course must have believed them honourable. After
this Miss Longworth embarked at Balaklava, and
she positively swears that on this occasion, at night,
and again on the deck of a steamer, she received a
proposal of instant marriage, to be celebrated at the
Greek Church of the place, with no condition but
that of secrecy. This offer, however, she states she
rejected, a Greek Church being out of the question
in the case of a marriage with a Roman Catholic,
although from this time she firmly believed an
union with Yelverton would soon be accomplished.
Major Yelverton gives quite an opposite account,
detailing a scene so gross that we cannot allude to
it ; and from this time till the spring of 1857 Miss
Longworth and he had no personal intercourse.
Many letters, however, had passed between them,
betokening, certainly, in our judgment, an ardent
attachment on her part, and on his a gallant, though
less passionate, feeling; and it- should he observed
that when returning to England, instead of passing
through Constantinople, where be well knew that
the lady was, he took the route of the Danube and
Vienna, for the purpose, as he says, of avoiding
danger. In Feb.,1857,he was quartered at Leith Fort,
near Edinburgh, and while there Miss Longworth,
in the company of a lady who has since become a
Sister of Mercy, once more sought him out and
renewed the acquaintance, and saw him repeatedly
at different places. On one of these occasions the
lady deposes that Major Yelverton, while at her
residence, read over with her the English marriage

chiefly of managers and parties
the different metropolitan theatres as well as
the proprietors of music-halls, who - wer e anxious
to hear the further proceedings in reference to the
summons obtained by Mr. Benjamin Webster
against Mr. Morton, of Canterbury Hall, as well
as to learn the decision of the magistrate, Mr.
Elliott, on the subject.
This case seemed to excite the most intense in-
tereE t. Not only was the court crowded to suffo-
cation, but the different avenues leading to it were
also throLged to excess.

. • .
;l1;•. H. T. Cole, of the Western Circuit, attended
as before, in support of the summons, and Mr.
Sleizh appeared on the part of Mr. Morton.

When the ease was called on, Mr. Sleigh rose
and said, that in the observations ho had to maker
in answer to the case brought forx ard, he should
be strictly pertinent to the law and to the issue
raised. He had no wish to make any remarks in
reference to the objects of those who had raised the
complaint. His only object was, as well as that of
tb worthy magistrate, to arrive at a just conclu-
sfott in respect of the matter, and if possible to pre-
vent further litigation. He was anxious to confine
himself strictly to discussing the law, and the facts
of the case that he was prepared to prove. He
wal anxious, however, in the first instance, to
protest against his learned friend importing the
Margate case into this inquiry. He had thought
proper to intimate that there was already a solemn
decision of the Court of Queen's Bench as to what
constituted a stage play. A report had been pro-
duced of that case, which he had had the oppor-
tunity of looking into, and the facts were totally
dissimilar to those in the present case. The facts
Margate
easrraegyadtt
that
ffaetcraesnet,
that and
de
decision
thene
ol law w
the
Court
present.us
0t u ber: applied to
each particular case. It would be idle and absurd
Bench was to govern every other kind of perform-
ance. There was a wide distinction between the
There Queen's
e the
re
were scenery and a change of scenery,
adapted to the performance, as well as in the
Sheffield case, to which, however, his learned
friend had not called particular attention, thinking
—or those who instructed him—that "discretion
was the better part of valour." In the Sheffield
case there was a distinguishing feature. There was
scenery there, but none here, and also a clear con-
nected plot, which there was not in the present case.
In that case the magistrates woUld 'not take upon
themselves the responsibility of construing it into
what is generally known as a dramatic perfor-
ante, and they acted_ in the same manner as .the ,
magistrates at Margate—they disniissed 'the , cora-
plaint. He would be the last to question the pro-
priety of the decision that had been arrived at.
No doubt the Court of Queen's Bench was, well .
justified by the case submitted for its consideration
from Margate, as much depended on the manner in
which the case submitted was framed.

Mr. Elliott here inquired if die Sheffield OW
referred to was reported.
Mr. Sleigh replied that it was reported in the
Sheffield Tines, a copy of which: he then held in
his hand. The case was heard before a full bench
of magistrates. There there was a scene—a col-
lege—and other things necessary for the piece;
and as Mr. Overend, who appeared as counsel
in the case, very properly said, in order to con-
stitute a play, I:there must be an assumption
of character,, and a change of scenery ; that
had not been proved. So in this case all that had
been proved was the speaking of a dialogue alone.
and, as Mr. Overend said in the Sheffield case, if
that was a comedy, tragedy, or farce, he hoped l
should never see such a thing. He (Mr. Sleigh}
quite agreed with Mr. Overend, and, in his opinion,
if this piece, entitled the "Enchanted Hash," had
been so described, those who had witnessed it might,
if they chose, succeed in an action against Mr. Mor-
ton for being fraudulently imposed upon in paying
their money. The learned gentleman here referred
to the various statutes passed for the purpose of
regulating theatres, commenting upon each, and
contending that, giving the largest possible inter-
pretation to each, the entertainment at Canterbury
Hall did not come within their provisions. That
what took place there was within the scope of the
act under which he was licensed, namely, for music
and dancing, and other public entertainments of the
like kind. He had a large number of witnesses to
call, who would prove that in no way whatever
could this be considered a stage play, or the
slightest possible infringement of the statute for
the regulation of theatres. His client was pro-
tected by the statute of George the Second, and he
felt satisfied that, on a full consideration of tho
whole of the facts, that the decision of tne worthy
magistrate would be against the complainant and
in favour of the defendant, and such decision woulel
substantially crush in the outset—he would take the
liberty of saying—a contemptible and unworthy
interference with the rights of a respectable man.
(Loud cheers.)
The learned counsel then called a great many
witnesses connected with theatres, who gave their
opinion that the " Enchanted Hash" was neither a
stage play nor a pantomime. When the evidence
was concluded,
Mr. Elliott, without calling on Mr. Cole for his
reply, proceeded to deliver his judgment as follows:
This is a summons against Mr. Morton, the pro-
prietor of Canterbury Hall, for keeping a place of
public resort for the performance of stage-plays,
without being duly licensed, and the question for
me to decide is, whether this is a stage-play, within
the meaning of the provisions of the act of Par-
liament, 6 and 7 Victoria. Upon the best conside-
ration that I have been enabled to give the matter,
having had an opportunity of looking over the
cases quoted and the law on the subject since the
last time this question was before me, I have come
to the conclusion that I am bound by the decision
of the Court of Queen's Bench, and therefore I hold
that this is the performance of a stage play within
the meaning of the interpretation clause of the act,
the words of which are, " Stage plays shall be taken
to include every tragedy, comedy, farce, opera, bur-
letta, interlude, melodrama, pantomime, or other
entertainment of the stage or any part thereof."
The nature of the performance in the case cited, as
well as in the one before me is, that which is called
a duologue between two persons. The whole of
the performance is in character, as well as the
action of the piece. I think, unquestionably, if I
am to define what a play is, I sheuld say anything
in which a person acts or represents it character and
action, on any stage or platform, or any public place
of the sort. Unquestionably my own opinion is,
this is a play. The learned counsel who appeared
for the defendant, and who has so ably conducted
his case, said there was a distinction between the
case quoted and this, inasmuch as no scenery was in-
troduced here, and there might have been in the
other one. Whatever might have been the nature
of the case, the parties themselves have almost con-
cluded it by calling the performance a pantomime,
and I have therefore come to the conclusion that
this is an entertainment contrary to the act of Par-
liament. The piece no doubt itself is a harmless
piece of burlesque, and there is no wish on the part
of the prosecutor in any way to press for a large
( amount of damages. He wishes merely to have
my decision on the legality of the performance, and
he will be perfectly satisfied by my imposing a
penalty of £5.
Mr. Sleigh said he hoped the worthy magistrate
would not consider it disrespectful, but it viUs their
intention to give notice of appeal at the next
Quarter Sessions.
Mr. Cole said it would save expense to both par-
ties if Mr. Elliott would grant them acase under the
statute, in order that it might be brought before
the Court of Queen's Bench during the next term,
or the sitting after.
ownpdneeo
During
ls
declaration
ca asSt t
yilioeon, inngwtt
hhht
whehe
.hebeapikosi
cdrudhwogyht
wgareosaea:st
suggestion
tiheoool
protracted
cdrpdooorfulc
cyoore
cnht_
ee. didc.
es
cheered
ee learnedene
rgphe
sidbs,
yacbna ssydt
friend,ee pwi nhahin cis
several
hda
had not concluded till a late hour, Mr. Arnold, the
magistrate at Westminster Court, and who is
owner of the Lyceum Theatre, and other gentle-
' men, occupied seats on the bench.

[ADVERTISEMENT.]—We are happy to quote the follow-
ing interesting information from Du Barry's Report on
cures without Medicine by Du Barry's Revalenta Arabica
Food. Cure No. 4,2oB—Servant of Rev. John W. Flavell,
Ridlington Rectory, Norfolk, of eight years' dyspepsia' ner-
vousness, debility, with cramps, spasms, and nausea. Cure
18,216—Dr. Andrew Ure of constipation dyspepsia, nervous
irritability. Cure No. 36,212—Captain Allan of epileptic
fits. Cure No. I,6o9—Three years' excessive nervousness,
with pains in my neck and left arm, and general dbeebein-
lity, which rendered my life very miserable,has
ta Arabica
radically removed by Du Barry'
aggravate and
Food. Alex. Stuart, Archdeacon sofßßevoesise,nSkibbereen.
Avoid Pills and Medicines : they invarial
appointment,
perpetuate diseases ; their atm.
and expense may be avoided YTmeetou 1813arry's Food
C times its cost in
ie dhout purging,
which, at a few pence per day,
eb
eysnalva'sellisyg,
other remedies, removing s :
stia
n crvous, bilious
Certificate
aud
consequences.P
constipation, indigestion qty p
liver complaints and all their
Andrew
No. 36,418. We find ft the safest remedy. lire,
MD., F.R.S., Dr Harvey, Dr. -Wurzer, Dr. Shorland, Dr.
11 Let invalids avoid the fearful dangers of spu-
rious
Campe .
and injurious imitations offered under a variety of
false pretences. Nevill's imitations are prohibited by the
high Court of Chancery under a penllty of £5,000 against
Alfred Ilooper Nevill and his agents; and the pretences
that Nevill has a patent for Arabica Food and that Du
Barry's are connected with such patent are utterly fake.
No canister is genuine without the name Barry Du Barry
and Co., 77, Rewent-street, in full, on theseal and wrapper.
Shopkeepers who attempt imposition in one article must
expect to be distrusted in all others. Packed in tins llb.
2s. 9d.; 21b. 4s. 6d. ; Sib. lls.; 121 b. 225. ; 241 b. 40s. The
121 b. and 241 b. canisters are sent carriage free on receipt
of Post-office order by Barry Du Barry and Co., 77, Re.
gent-street, London; Fortnum Mason, and Co. •
,_ Abbio,
60, Graceehureh-street ; 4, Cheapeide; 63 and 150, Cox.
bard-street ; no and 451, Strand; 49 and 60, Bishopsgate-
street ; Batty, 16, Finsbury Pavement ; Phillips and Ca.
tea-dealers; Petty, Wood, and Co., King William-street,
City; at 127 Sigh Holborn; and all grocer',

A branch of the Wilts and Dorset Bank has been
opened at Andover, in consequence of Mr. Heath having
given up banking business in that town.

It is well known that the Railway Companies
when delivering packages which are sent by them, refuse
to allow the peri,ons receiving them to examine the state of
the goods before the parties sign the receipt, and pay the
carriage. The Tribunal of Commerce of Epernay lately
gave judgment against the Eastern Railway Company in
two cases of that kind, in which mercers of that town were
the plaintiffs,
and 9h appal by the Company to the Impe-
rial Court of Paris, those judgments were confirmed, thus
securing to the receivers the right hitherto refused.
[ADVERTISEMENT.] —Holloway's Ointment and Pills.—
Whooping Cough, Colds, Pneumonia.—These infantile
disorders were the terrors of parents, who knew the impos-
sibility of administering medicine internally to children,
till Professor Holloway discovered his invaluable Oint-
ment. This Ointment, rubbed externally on the throat
and chest, passes through the skin, and penetrates to the
affected tissues, without causing the irritability and fever-
ishness always produced by a child's repugnance to medi-
eine, and which vastly procrastinate the cure. No incon-
venience or difficulty attaches to this treatment, by which,
thousands of children are annually saved ortoseu
against pulmonary disease. In all disorderasrdi
childhood is particularly liable, parents, gu
to Ointment,
nurses may with confidence resort to Hollov_ra
which, when practicable, should be assisted his purify-
ing Pills. "an