The Sun.
London, England, 1857-04-16 00:00:00

THE LATE STORM.

During the storm which broke over the West
Riding of Yorkshire on Friday last, as already re-
ported iu The Sun, the house of Mr. T. P. Rams-
den, of Pontefract, was struck by the electric fluid,
which divided into two currents, one pa-sing down
the chimney and striking Mr. Ramsden, who was
standing near the fire, and also his daughter, who
was seated a short distance from him. Mr. Rams-
den was not much injured, but- his daughter was
prostrated with great violence, rendered blind and
insensible, and lost the use of her lower extremi-
tirs. She is now slowly recovering from the effects
of the shock. Another person and a child who
were sitting in the same room escaped uninjured.
The second current of electricity passed down one
side of the house, entering one of the rooms and
passing out of the window down a fall-pipe, the
bottom of which was shattered to pieces, notr an
iron holdfast. At this point the electric fluid re-
euteited the house, struck a cheffonier in one of the
lower rooms, tore one of the doors irom its binges,
and broke it, tegether with a quantity of glass and
other articles. The storm took a sonth-easterly
direction, and burst with considerable violence be-
tween. Bawtry and Bet'', .rd in the afternoon of the
day above-mentioned. During the same afternoon
it also visited the Isle of Axliolme, North Lincoln-
shire, and is described as very violent. In the
evening a similar visitation was experienced at
Boston, in the vicinity of which town the lightning
struck the residence of Mr. Mowbray, farmer, of
Hill-dike Bar, and completely demolished the gable
of the house, penetrated into the interior, and ir,-
jured three of the servants more or less. A cat
sitting by the side of ono of these persons was
htruck dead. Another of them was completely
paralysed by the shock, and remained for some
time in an alarming state of Prostration. Several
places in and about the house bear traces of the
course of the electric fluid. Numerous accidents
of a minor character are reported in the above loca-
lities, but there was Ica() loss of human life.

The parties to this action are Captain Ling and
Major Croker, and the case was one of an extra-
ordinary kind, its p-rincipal feature being that at
'the trial letters were produced purporting t' have
been written from Captain Laing to his wife, from
which it appeared that be was cognisant' of the in-
timacy between her and Major Croker, end offered
to take money to settle the afrair, and also detailing
in most disgusting terms what had taken place be-
tween himself and a woman at Strumla. On the
part of the plaintiff it was said that these letters
were forgeries. The trial took place before Mr.
Justice Willes; in Middlesex, and the jury gave a
verdict for the plaintiff, damage, 1,0001.
Mr. E. James now moved to set aside that ver-
dict, and to have a new trial, upon certain facts dis-
closed on affidavits. He said that the case mainly
turned upon the question of the genuineness of the
letters, for everybody acquiesced in the ruling of his
lordship, that if the letters were genuine the smallest
possible amount of damages would satisfy the jus-
tice of thecase, even if there should not be a verdict
for the defendant upon the 'ground of leave and
licjr...T he case was one that would demand the
u tteniion of their lordships, from the serious
and most painful issues'which-were raised. between.
'these parties. The plaintiff, Capt Ling, had Married
the darighter of Sir J. Littler whilst in India, al d
Major Croker was at that time adjutant of
.Sir
John Littler's staff. An acquaintance had existed
between the lady and Major Croker previous to
her marriage, and that was renewed on the voyage
home, and it was conceded on both sides that adul-
tery had been committed. The case, as he said, de-
pended much upon the genuineness of certain letters
which were now in the hands of the associate, and
which he need not disgust their lordships byreading.
Captain Ling had gone to Turkey after he returned

from India, and was with the Turkish contingent
at Shumla down to September, 1856. Mrs. Ling
went down to reside• with her mother in the neigh-
bourhood of Torquay. During his absence there
was no doubt that criminal intercourse took place
with Major Croker, and the letter showed that
Captain Ling had sanctioned this intercourse wi h
his wife. Immediately after his return from
Scutari he wrote to his wife, addressing her as
"My dear Madam," and stating, "You had better
when you write to Croker, direct under cover to
the agent. For God's sake take care Lady Littler
does not see the letters passim: to and fro between
you. I sent you yesterday a letter from C.."
Mr. Justice Willes—As to the other letters, it
was enough to say that they were written after
hearing of the infidelity of his wife, and he asked
to be paid for it. .
Mr. James would not disgust their lordships by
referring to the terms of the letters,' but would
come at once to the serious question whether they
were genuine or not ; but he must remark that it
did appear to be• an anomaly in our law that the
only"three persons from whom the truth as to the
genuineness of these letters could .be elicited were

not capable of giving evidence, the plaintiff, his
wife, and the defendant. Major Crolier's affidavit
stated that he had nothing to do with the concoc-

tion of these letters, and Mrs. Ling asserted tlial
they were genuine.
Mr. Justice Willes inquired if there was any affi-
davit of surprise! _ _

Mr. James—There was an an affidavitof surprise
at the handwriting being disputed.
The Chief Justice—What was the evidence of
handwriting ?
Mr. Justice Willes--A
.sergeant who came home
with invalid troops, and he had every day to take
his accounts to Capt. Ling, who signed them. There
was also a soldier, who produced a certificate of cha-
racter from Capt. Ling.

-Mr. James—lnd there was also Mr. Carnell, the
mate of the vessel in which they came home. He
trusted their lordships would direct a further in-
vestigation of the matter. Mrs. Ling now asserted
in the most distinct terms that those letters were
in her husband's handwriting, and that they were
written to her, and that he had written similar let-
ters to her before. It -WAS never anticipated that
Sir F. Tbesiger was instructed to deny that these
were in the plaintiff's handwriting, and therefore
the question of handwriting was not tried as it
might otherwise have been tried. The lady was of
high respectability in all except this occurrence, and
she handed the letters to the solicitor, and the de-
fendant did not bring the same proof of handwrit-
ing as if it was an action on a bAnker's cheque.
Mr Justice Crowder inquired whether there was
an affidavit of the plaintiff ?_.
- - -

Mr. James-Oh, yes ' • distinctly swearing that
the writing was not his. It was a most painful case.
Mr. Justice Cresswell said there was a difficulty
as to the wife's affidavit. He did not think that
they could look at it at all.
Mr. James—Then their lordships must exclude
the husband's affidavit also.
Mr. Justice Willei said that when the cass was be-
fore him on an application t.) stay execution other
affidavits were produced as to handcar ting.
Mr. James—ln "Hawker v. Seale" the court
decided that they would not read the affidavit of

the wife, denying the adultery ; but here the affi-
davit of the wife was only as to the genuineue3s of
handwriting. If such an affidavit wa4 ivadmi-sible
it would be a perfect impediment to the investiga-
tion of the truth. He submitted that there was a
distinction between an affidavit denying the adul-
tery and an affidavit as to handwriting.
Mr. Justice Cresswell thought that there was no
,difference.

Mr. James—The position, then, would be that
the three persons who alone could know anything
about the matter could not give evidence at the
trial, and if there was a miscarriage the only per-
sons who could know whether the letters were
genuine or not were not allowed to mike affidivits.
The Chief Justice—That clause was founded

upon a notion that much public scandal would
arise from the examination of parties to cases of
this kind. As these persons could not b 3 examined
if a new trial were granted, the question was whit
other evidence there was ?

Mr. James—There was abundant evidence. It
was usual on long voyages to write a sort of news-
paper on board the vessel, and Capt. Ling when he
went out took a very active part in editing or writ-
ing in the newspaper. They had obtained that news-
paper, and if the rule were granted a most minute
examination might be made of i-. It would ba seen
that there was a most extraordinary similarity as to
handwriting, showing that Capt. Ling wrote diffe-
rently at different times. Some of the experts stated
that they did pot believe the letters to be in the
handwriting of Capt. Ling, and oce of the principal
reasons for that opinion was that there was a parti-
cular turn in the letter D. This newspaper had
been examined, and in almost every inst ince the D
bad the particular form from which the experts rea-
soned that the letters were not ganuine. They ha,i
procured the newspaper from Captain Webb, who
commanded the vessel in which they sailed, and the
genuineness of the document, h believed, would
not be disputed on the other side. These letters
detailed circumstances which had taken place in
Captain Ling's tent in Turkey, and if they were
forgeries they were the most skilful ones which had
ever been produced by the erea!est crimin•il.
Mr. Justice Cresswell inquii ed whether there
was any evidence as to who ha'l forged the letters ?
Mr. James—There was not the slightest sug-
gestion.
Mr. Justice Willes—There was this : Mr. Brem-
ridge in his evidence was pr,-!ceeding to say that the
letters were like Mrs. Ling's handwriting, when
there was a sort of desire not to bring that on, and
nothing further was said. The witness blurted it out
without any question being put t, him.
Mr. James said that Sir F. Thesiger did not sug-
gest, in his summing up, who it was that hadforged
them. The trial had caused great excitement, and
it having reached Mrs. Ling's ears that it was im-
puted that she had forged the letters, she at once
made the affidavit, denying in the most solemn
terms that she had done so.

The Chief Justice said a rule would' be granted,
but there must be some further affidavits as to the
surprise and as to the handwriting. As to the ad-
missibility of the wife's affidavit, that must be dis-
cussed when the case came on, on cause being
shown.
Rule granted.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.—Arm 15.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Fonblanque.)
BANKRUPTCY OF COL. WAUGH.
An adjudication • of bankruptcy Was marle this
morning against the well-known Col. Waugh, late
of the London and Eastern Bank. The petitioning
creditor is Mr. William Samuel Price Hughes, of
Worcester, gentleman. Waugh is described iu
the
petition as follows :—" William Petrio Waugh, of
Branksea Island, in the county of Doiset, and of