The Sun.
London, England, 1850-08-15 00:00:00

N° 18 063.]
• 67:77a4.1 Vrp.. r 5.7.2
LONDON, TIIURSDAY rz3rf P'4;l7
Eti T 4 #4.&..1.1
n, -4
• AU-GUST 15, 1850.

RAVESEND STAN. PACKETS
t't /'oro Cabin and Secon. Class Railway NINEPENCE to
or from London and (ravesend.
;;alOOl2 And Eir4 Class ditto, ONE SHILLING.
To or from Black-wall.
P.,;re Cabin •• • • •• (id. Chief Cabin.... 9d.
Intermediate Piers •••• • • .. Ed.
:kets call at the Grays, Greenhithe, and Purtieet
call at the Piers as underlined (weather permitting).
'ROM TERRACE PIER, GRAVESEND.

No oher Pad
The racliets

aoshr-,
vilic.

t*l
itykl t9Y
-

5 -
616 -

7 i -
8 i -

:-F.TC DA

Grays

reeT -
h!the.

- I• -

C'ur-
dect

Time

8%

DAN S

;ostir-
Tine.

Grays

Green-'
hithe.

:t'ur-
deet

Direct Trains from the Boats marked t
Omnibuses from Fenchurch-street Station to all parts of London
every quarter of an hour.
FROM BRUNSWICK WHARF, BLACKWALL, on the arrival of

the Trains front the Fenchurch-street Station.

SUNDAYS.
WEEK VA"'
Roshr-
Time. r- Green-
Illoshr-
Tine.
rime* Pur- Grr- Gray; fleet Ihhue•
a. m•
1-- --
_
Grays vine.
9
10
_ ii. m fleet hilhe.
9%
I 0
10
11
.... 1N
11 __
12
1 ——'—_ 1%
214
_ 2 IA
_
3%
3%
__ v 5
4i
64
.s;i
77% ! •

Passages noirlted are run direct,
cited to stop at Piers or for Boats.

BOAT TICKETS.—TweIve Months, 41.
Chree Months, 11. 15s. ; to be had of the
packets ; or Air. Monk, Terrace Pier, Gra,
August, 1550.

os Yacseta noc

48. ; Six Months, 2,
Collectors on boa

ig per-

r. 15s. ;
rd the

FO R D'S IATELLING-TON FAMILY and
COMMERCIAL HOTEL, DALE-STREET, LIVERPOOL.
This Hotel, situated in the immediate vicinity of the Exchange,
Docks, and other places of public and commercial resort, is fitted up
in first-rate style, and the accommodations tor American, Foreign, as
well as English .:trangers, will he found everything that is desirable,
while the arrangements of the "Cuisine" are in the hands of a first-rate
Cook. The Proprietor urther wishes to intimate that his Coffee
and Commercial Rooms, as well as Sitting and Bed Rooms, will bo
found second to none in the kingdom.
N.B. Tae charges tbr servants are included in the Ein (except those
who only slay a few hours), viz., Waiter, Porter, and Chambermaid,
and it is respectfully intimated that all further payment is unne-
cessary.

Third Series, complete in itself, in One very large Volume, doubl
columns, square crown Bvo., price One Guinea,
Q 0 U THE Y'S COMMONPLACE BOOK.
i THIRD SERIES, being ANALYTICAL READINGS. Edited
by his Son-in-Law, the Rev. J. W. WALTER, 13.1).
" We are disposal to think this the mo-t important and useful se-
ries of Southey's Commonplace-Books which has yet been made
pub-
lic. This bo.,k will Indicate sources and kinds of infor-
mation known but to untiring and universal students, such as Southey
was."—Examiner.
London : Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans.

EAF.NESS AND SINGING NOISES IN
THE HEAD.

Instant Cure by Dr. BENNETT'3 _Newly-discovered Remedy,
without pain to an infant or the in,st aged sufferer. Its application
in all cases of Deafness enables sufferers of either sex, although
having been afflicted for fifty years, instantly to hear a whisper,
many of whose cases by the old treatment had been pronounced in-
curable.

This valuable Remedy to be had Genuine only of Dr. Bennett, at
the institution for the Cure of Deafness, 80, Upper Stamford-street.
Waterloo Bridge-road, London, in cases of 55., sent free to all parts
with trill directions, on receipt of poet stamps for the same.
' "

Attendance to poor persons Monday, cVednesday, and Friday
Evenings, from Six till Eight.

OR. LA'MERT ON THE SECRET INFIRMITIES OF YOUTII
AND MATURITY.—WITH 40 COLOURED ENGRAVINGS ON
STEEL.
lust published, and may be had in French or English, in a Sealed
Envelope, 2s. 6d., or post-free, from the Author, for forty-two
Stamps,
SELF-PRESERVATION; a
Medical Treatise en the Physiology of Marriage, and on
the Secret Infirmities and Disorders of Youth and Maturity,
usually acquired at an early period of life, which debilitate
the physical and mental powers, diminish and enfeeble the natural
reclines, and exhaust the vital energies of Manhood ; with Practical
Observations on the Treatment of Nervous Debility and Indigestion,
whether arising from these causes, close study, er the Influence of
tropical climates: Local and Constitutional Weakness, Syphilis,
Stricture, and ail Diseases and Derangements resulting from Indis-
cretion. With Forty coloured Engravings, illustrating the
anatomy. Physiology, and Diseases of the Reproductive Organs,
explaining theja streclum es, uses, and functions, and the various
lajuries that are produced in them by solitary habits, excesses, and
infection. BY SAMUEL LA'YLERT, M.D.,
37, BEDFORD-SQUARE. LONDON.
Doctor of Medicine. Matriculated Member sf the University of Edin-
burgh, Licentiate of Apothecaries' H all, London, Honorary Member
of the London Hospital Medical Sof dety, &c.
This work contains an accurate end complete account of the
Anatomy and Physiology of the Ileproductive Organs. It un-
fertunately happens that the unhappy victim of excessive indul-
gence and vicious habits, while suffering from their invariable con-
sequences, unwisely entertains a fear of apelying to a qualified physi-
cian for relief. Shame and the dread so frequently, but erro-
neously entertained that then complaints are beyond the reach of
art, alike restrict him and prevent We eeeking or assistance where
alone it can be procured. Dr. LA'MERT has taken the highest
medical honours, as his eliplomas testify, and the great extent of his
practice for many years is a guaraneee for his professional experi-
ence, which has reference almost ece.ely to time treatment of these
diseases.
Published by ehe Author, and may :be had of Kent and Richards,
me, Paternostmerow ; Hannay, 63, Orford-etreet; Starts, Tichborne-
mteeet. Haymarket; Mann, 39, Cornhill ; Gordon, 145, Leaden-
hall-street, London; or, free by pore. for forty-two stamps. from
the Author's Residence. 37. imeilfere-sa tier° London.

ASSIZE INTE fr_,LIGENCE:
HOME ClRCUlT.—Guildford, Aug. 13.
'Before the LORD CHIEF BAR‘)N and a Special Jury.'

CASE V. 13.1:KER.

This was an action for crirct. con., to which the de-
fendant, pleaded not guilty. The, damages were laid
at 2,000/.

Mr. M. Chamberz, Q.C., Mr. E. James, Q.C.,
and Mr. Wordsworth were for the plaintiff; Ser-
geant Shee, Mr. Bramwell, sud Mr. Norton for the
defendant.

Mr. CHAMBERS said that the case he was about to

lay before the jury was one of the deepest importance
to the plaintiff. He charged the defendant upon this
record with having seduced and debauched his wife,
and that injury was aggravat ed by the fact that the
plaintiff and the defendant h td been for many years
on the strictest terms of intin•,,acy and friendship, and,
as he was instructed, the latter had taken advantage
of the confidence of his Friend and inflicted the

serious injury upon him of which he now complained.
The plaintiff, Mr. John !larch Case, was a navy
agent, carrying on his businetis in the Adelphi, and
the defendant was a Parliamemtary agent in Spring-
gardens, and as he had bet ore informed them, for
many years before the pleb stiff was united to the
unhappy lady whose conduct formed the subject of
the present inquiry, they bad been on the most
friendly terms. In May of 1.838 the plaintiff became
acquainted with the young lady, Miss Turner, who
was at that time living with :her mother and step-
father, and after some court s;hip they were married
at Lambeth Church in Febr►aary, 1839. Before the
marriage the plaintiff was not acquainted with the
precise condition of the family, and he (the Learned
Counsel) thought it right to inform the jury, as no
doubt it would come out in the coursetof the case,
that the lady was an illegitimate child. The parties
lived in happiness and har crony, and one child was
the result of their union, to which they both seemed
devotedly attached. Mrs. C:i se, however, it appeared
was not a very good-tempered woman, and he was
sorry to say that after they had been married some
time differences and quarrels; arose between her and
her husband, and, according to his instructions, the
defendant did all in his power secretly to foment
those discords for his own base purposes ; and he be-
lieved that under his advice iia the beginning of 1849,
the plaintiff quitted his house for a short time, and he
would read them a letter writ ten by defendant to him
during his absence. He was instructed that this
letter was written for the must base and treacherous
purpose, for while apparently the object of the de-
fendant was to heal the differences that existed be-
tween the parties, he believed there was very little
doubt that at this very period the defendant had suc-
ceeded in debauching the pLaintiff's wife, and the
real object he had in view •was to enable the guilty
intimacy to be carried on wi t«h greater security. The
letter was as follows :

" 29, Sprin -garclens, Feb. 2, 1849.
" My dear Case,—Mrs. Ca se is disposed to let things
remain as they are. You kitoer her great economy, so
that except in rent, I don't thin k there can be any saving
by having the furniture sold a ud the home disposed of,
and it will be prudent at all el mints to see what time—a
few months—will bring about.., ,It must do good to you
and to her, besides it is betto r as regards Mr. Bailey,
who may not know aoy thing about your differences. I
think she continues greatly to desire to live with you,
and in time all things may cot ae right. I hope so, and
I hope you will not destroy all chance of this by refusing
to sanction the arrangement. Depend on it that this
will be for your own and little, Emma's interest; but I
don't want you to be guided 4 by what I say. Consult
Bastern, if, as I suppose, he knows any thing of your
family concerns. lie says a he is in want of money.
She cannot aik Mr. Bailey for any without stating
what it is for, and this, of course, she does not wish
to disclose. I asked her to at ,y how much she wanted
per week, hut she says she. would rather leave this
to you, and be satisfied with vihat you will do. Now,
pray do this; it binds you to nothing, and does
not place you in a false uosition, no matter what
may arise. She says there are a few debts fur little
Emma, and that 5/awould pay'. Send this also. What
I want you to do, and to appear is, that though you are
angry and determined not to Jive with her, yet you will
treat her generously. This: has more effect on a
woman's temper and disposition than anything, and
really I do see such evident s igns of affection for you,
and of real grief, how matters are, that I am in hope—
strong and confident hope, that by mutual explanation
and forbearance, you will in ti me find in a re-union the
cementing of your mutual hap Anees. Enclose in a note
to Mrs. Case the sum you in.' end giving.
" Yours, my dear Case, truly,
" T. BARER."
If the letter had been writt.t. n in a fair and honest
desire to settle the unhappy differences between the
plaintiff and his wife, no complaint could be made of
the terms in which it was couched ; but if, as he
was instructed, it was written with the treacherous
and perfidious object such as he had suggested, it
was for the jury to say 'whether this was not a
grevious aggravation of 'the injury which the
defendant had inflicted. The Learned Counsel
then explained that the Mr. Bailey referred to in the
letters was an old gentleman who took a great in-
terest in the welfare of Mrs.. Case, and who upon her
marriage with the plaintiß settled 1,7001. upon
her, and afterwards had acted most kindly to her
upon many occasions; and it appeared that the de-
fendant had also been made her trustee, and this, he
sail, of course gave him some influence over her,
particularly when the plaintiff also accepted him as
the mediator between him a tid his wife ; and there
could be no doubt that thie defendant had basely
taken advantage of those circumstances to seduce her.
Soon after this period the pl tintiff and his wife lived
together again, but he discovered, to his misfortune,
that her conduct was now completely altered. She
had before always appeared attached to her home and
her child, but now these feelings no longer appeared
to exist in her breast. She was frequently away from
borne, and at her desire the little girl Emma was
sent to school at Blackheath. Her repeated absences,
ri co t huo s sheetdh e
teereturned
sus-
picioninquiries
fsoahi
homealnneydseipi
atsidi
ah:1)
ncmeoafccftiraaeedist:tileiaunt,
joe4fnpntl occasionsgi
nhttiplaintiff.
at I
nlengthupon
wwe
aroused
d bacseifleetnco cuvtarohsseeeerl;etuserhci.
nreeaßlidro..aaedidl
etbyheha,estin,e,
assth:hedsi usedsuspicions.
cuiov
n.oatsnos.
At first the plaintiff; di not dream.. that his friend Mr.
Blker could have any share in alienating i the affection
w
(h)foihnies
oaaniafe,vibsiutt‘lootiieis day,ehid, a circumstance lew as
occurredom
which at once fixed euspicion upon that gentleman.

It appeared that, on the 25th of August in last year,
a gentleman called while he was away, and Mrs. Case
; came down to him, shook hands with him, and took
him into a parlour, and the servant having some sus-
; picion what was goingon, watched the parties, and he
believed that upon that occasion an act of criminal
) intercourse took place, and that Mr. Baker was the
, guilty party. He thought he ought to state that the
1
servant upon this occasion said that Mr. Baker was
not the man, but this be believed was owing to the
• circumstances under which she saw him, for upon a
third occasion, when she saw him in his ordinary
dress, she at once identified him as the party. From
[ this time the plaintiff broke off all connexion with
his wife, and having reason to believe that
the defendant continued to carry on an illicit
: intercourse with her, the necessary steps were
taken to obtain the required information upon the
subject, and also with regard to the delendant'a pre-
vious conduct. He then proceeded to state, that the
defendant was seen to meet Mrs. Case on several
occasions at Vauxhall, and they were traced to the
Rose and Crown Inn, at Wimbledon, and there could
be no doubt the adulterous intercourse had been car-
ried on by them at that place on repeated occasions,
until at length the necessary steps were taken, and
Mr. Stafford, the plaintiff's solicitor,
accompanied by
other persons, proceeded to the Rose and Crown, and
the parties were identified. These were the facts,
and it appeared to him that they would-establish a
case of the basest perfidy against the defendant. He
was looked upon as a dear friend, he was entrusted
with the sacred task of endeavouring to settle the
unhappy differences between the plaintiff and his
wife, and he took a base advanfl).ige of these circum-
stances still further to foment disoiard between them
for his own wicked object of seducing the unhappy
woman. The damages were laid at 2,0001., and
when the jury had heard all the facts, he believed
they would consider that sum not at all too large to
be paid by the defendant for the wrong he had com-
mitted.
The following evidence was then adduced :
Mr. R. Shaw deposed that he was present at the
marriage of the plaintiff and his wife, on the 22d Fe-
bruary, 1839, at Lambeth church. He had known
Mr. Case for many years, but was notat all acquainted
with his wife before the marriage. Witness visited
them occasionally after the marriage. Mrs. Case was
an accomplished lady-like young woman, and from
what witness saw they appeared to live comfortably
and happily together. They used sometimes to speak
" sharply" to one another ; but he never heard them
quarrel.
By Sergeant SIIEE—Could not recollect the places
they lived at when he visited them. He only went a
few times. He remembered the birth of the first child,
Emma. It might have come a little before the pro-
per time.—(A laugh.) He did not observe that the
plaintiff 's wits was pregnant at the time of the mar-
riage ; but he knew the child was born before the
proper time. The plaintiff did not upon any occasion
tell him that the child was born six months after the
_ _

marriage. Mrs. Case was about 19 when the mar-
riage took place. During some of his visits they both
showed temper. Mrs. Case had no relative present at
the marriage.
Mr. Londensock, clerk to the plaintiff, deposed that
he carried on business as a navy agent in the
Adelphi, and that the defendant was a Parliamentary
agent, living in Spring-gardens. The plaintiff was
about 35 years old, and the defendant between 40 and
50. They were on intimate terms.

The witness then identified the handwriting of the
letter referred to in the opening speech of Mr. Chain-
ber, and it was put in and read.
Cross-examined—Never saw Mr. Baker at Mr.
Cases's table. lie was remarkably grey for his time
of life.

Hannah Charlton deposed that in 1849 she was in
;be service of the plaintiff, at No. 16', East-place,
Kennington-road. It was the custom of Mr. Case

to go on Saturday to see his daughter, who was at
school at Blackheath, and he generally stayed away
till Monday. She remembered Saturday, the 25th
of August in last year. On that day her master
went to Blackheath as usual, and the same evening
her mistress went out and did not return till

twelve o'clock at night. The next day she
noticed that her mistress was dressed smarter than
usual, and she was frequently standing at the
drawing-room and prlour window, as though she
expected some rile. About two o'clock a gentleman
called and inquired for Mr. Case. She told him he
was not at home, and he appeared to be feeling for a
card, when Mrs. Case came down, shook hands with
him, and asked him into the parlour. She particularly
noticed that the hair and whiskers of this gentleman
were quite grey. Witness went into the back kitchen,
and in consequence of hearing a noise in the room
where Mrs. Uase and the gentleman were, she went
upstairs, and on trying to'open the door she found it
was fastened. Having her suspicions roused she went
into the garden, and got a pair of steps, which she
placed against the window, and mounted upon them
and looked into the room. The witness then gave
evidence which left no doubt of the commission of a
criminal act by the parties. After the gentleman had
left the house Mrs. Case told her if Mr. Case should
make any inquiry not to say any gentleman called,
but to say that no one had been but Miss Baker. A
short time after this Mrs. Case rebuked her for some
neglect, and she told her in reply that she knew of
something which she would not like to have told.
A day or two after this the, plaintiff made
some inquiry of her, end she told him what
she had seen. She was afterwards taken by Mr.
Stafford, to the defendant's house, and she saw him in
his night shirt and a dressing-gown, and unshaved,
and could not recognise him as the same gentleman who
bed come to her master's house on the 25th August.
She was taken to see him a second time, and then she
could not identify him, because it appeared to her
that his whiskers were darker. The third time she
was accompanied by Mr. Case, and she was then cer-
tain Mr. Baker was the man. On the 23d of No,
vember she saw the same gentleman in company with
Mr 2. Case. At this time the plaintiff and his wife
were separated ; but she had lived near him in the
Kennington-road, and witness saw Mr. Baker go into
her house with her. Another gentleman accom-
panied them.

By Sergeant SHEE—Mr. Baker was an entire
stranger to her at the time he came to the house in
August. She was still in Mr. Case's service. She
said nothing of what took place until a month after-
wards, and then not until she had a quarrel with Mrs.
Case. She was very " fidgety,"
and her master told
her she was not to obey her mistress unless she pleased.
Her mistress had ordered her to take some clean linen
up stairs, and she said she would do so the next
morning, when her mother, who was present,
,kaid she
would not keep any servant who was so impertinent
to her, and her mistress said neither would she, and
ordered her to leave the house that day; and it was
upon tbis that she made the remark abput knowing
something respecting her mistress that would not be
agreeable to be told. Her master heard what she
said, but made no remark at the time, but soon after-
wards he asked her what she meant, and she told him
the story. She went to the window to peep, out of
mere curiosity. She suspected what was going on,
but she did not intend to say anything to her master,
but merely to gratify her own curiosity. Mr. Case
took her into his service without any character. The
plaintiff and his wife were not very good friends.
They used to quarrel almost every day. They never
appeared to be on good and affectionate terms, such
as a man and wife should be on. During the time
she was in Mrs. Case's service, her husband only
went out with her once. She never accompanied him
to visit the child at Blackheath. The plaintiff used
night by himself, and Mrs.
and sometimes she went out
to
Casego
aol
snot
uas lemd ot sot
geov eout,ry
before him.

Re-examined—When Mrs. Case went out, she
used to say she was going ao Mr. Bailey's, She took
a little too much to drink sometimes after dinner, and
then they used to quarrel. When this happened,
Mrs. Case would pull her shoes off, and lee hair fall
about her face, and she would open the window and
want to call for a policeman. This very frequently
happened after dinner.
Frances Fairlorner, chambermaid at the Rose and
Crown, Wimbledon, deposed that she remembered
Mr. Stafford, the solicitor, coming to the inn on the
21st and 29th of June last year, and on the latter day
he was introduced to a lady and gentleman. The
same lady and gentleman had been to the house a
great many times before. She could not say exactly
when they first came, but it was about twelve months
prior to this time. They were there generally twice
a week, and usually came about two o'clock, and or-
dered dinner at five. The room they occupied was a
front room, which opened into a bedroom, and this
wss the room they always occupied, except when it
happened to be engaged. In the winter time they
used to go away by the six o'clock up-train, but they
afterwards hired a fly from the house, and then they
did not go away till nine or ten o'clock. She never
heard their names, but they were known in the house
as the Vauxhall lady and gentleman, because the fly
always set them down at that place. They always
came alone.
Thotnaa Mapp deposed that he knew the plaintiff
and the defendant, and, by direction of Mr. Case, he
had watched the residence of the defendant in Spring-
gardens upon several occasions. On the 11th October,
1849, he saw Mr. Baker come out of his house, and

he followed him to the Vauxhall Railway Station,
I where he was joined by Mrs. Case, and they went
away together in the train. Upon another occasion
they met in the Haymarket, and he followed them
into St. James's Park, and after they had been in the
enclosure Mr. Biker went into his own house in
Spring gardenS, and Mrs. Case followed him in, and
they remained there for some time.
By Sergeant Sann—The plaintiff employe(' him to
watch his wife, and he reported to him all that oc-
curred. He had no motive of his own for watching
the parties. He had been Watching Mrs. Case for a
considerable time.
George Shipmore gave similar testimony. He also
proved that he followed Mr. Baker and Mrs. Case,
and traced them to the Rose and Crown at Wimble-
don, and he immediately returned to town, and gave
information to Mr. Stafford, who at once proceeded
there, accompanied by the clerk of the plaintiff and
witness. When they entered the room, Mr. Baker
and Mrs. Case were at dinner.
Mr. W. Stafford, the attorney for the. plaintiff, de-
posed, that upon the information he received from the
last witness, he proceeded to the Rose and Crown,
and saw them there at dinner. He did not know the
lady, but sbe was pointed out to him as Mrs. Case..
Mr. Stafford then reverted to the circumstances re-
lating to the servant girl having been taken to the
' house of the defendant to identify him, and he said
he was at first so satisfied that he was not the gen-
tleman who was at the plaintiff's house on the 25th
August, that he apologised to him for his Auspicion,
and said that Mr. Case would also, no doubt, do the
same. The defendant said he would see him, and he
agreed to bring Mr. Case in a quarter of an hour, and
be did so, but the defendant was denied, and this ex-
cited his suspicion, and induced him to make further
inquiries. Mr. Stafford added, that since these pro-
ceedings the colour of the defendant's whiskers ap-
peared to be changed, and were as though they had
been dyed. The defendant stated, at the time he re-
ferred to, that he had never been at Mr. Case's house
more than once or twice when he was absent, and he
asserted most positively that nothing improper had
ever taken place between him and Mrs. Case.
The settlement made upon Mrs. Case at her mar-
riage was then put in. It appeared that 1,7001. was
settled upon her and her issue, but the plaintiff also
took an interest in it, and had the power to borrow
half the money. Mr. Timothy Bailey and the defend-
ant were the trustees.
This was the plaintiff's case.
Sergeant SHBE then made a very able and forcible
address to the jury for the defendant. He said that if
they had had any experience in courts of justice they
would be aware that there were no cases which differed

so much in their circumstances as cases of criminal

conversation, and none which required more careful
and searching investigation at the hands of the jury.
The present case differed in a most important respect
from any other within his knowledge, for his Learned
Friend had omitted altogether the usual topics of
crushed hopes and blighted affections of the husband,
and appeared to rely for damages solely upon some
supposed treacherous conduct on the part of the defend-
ant. It appeared, therefore, that the plaintiff did not
allege any of the usual grounds that were urged in
cases or this description as a ground for da-
mages, but he relied merely upon the fact that
the defendant had seduced his wife, and for that
act he hoped the jury would give him money,
which was the only object of the present action.
It appeared pretty clear that the plaintiff was
tired of his wife, and that he wanted to get rid of
her, and to effect this object he did not scruple to
blast her reputation for ever. The formal ground of
action was that the defendant had seduced the wife of
the plaintiff, and alienated her affections from him,
and he would leave it to the jury to say what was the
value of the loss sustained by the plaintiff, when the
evidence showed that he had never treated her as a
husband, and that his conduct towards her had, long
before this transaction, entirely destroyed the affec-
tion she had once entertained for him. They had
heard the case that was opened on behalf of the plain-
tiff, and the evidence in support of it, and it appeared
to him that they must be in doubt at that moment
whether any criminal intercourse had really taken
place between the parties, and whether the whole pro-
ceeding was not a conspiracy to destroy the wife of
the plaintiff. He had never heard of such an extra-
ordinary case as the present. The action was brought
to recover damages for the loss of the society and
affections of the wife, and did the jury ever hear in
such a case of not one single witness being called by
the plaintiff to speak to the terms upon which the
parties had lived together ? The reason was
that they were well aware they could not show
the existence of any affectionate conduct between
the parties, and the duty was cast upon him to
inform the jury of the real facts of the case ;
and he should satisfy them, by the evidence he
should lay before them, that the conduct of the plain-
tiff towards his wife was of the most brutal and un-
manly description—that they lived together in the
most wretched manner, and that he absented himself
repeatedly from his home. If he proved these facts,
and the jury felt themselves compelled to return a
verdict for the plaintiff, the question then would arise,
what was the amount of damage the plaintiff had sus-
tained, and if they should be of opinion that he had
by his conduct destroyed the affection of his wife, and
driven her from home, and placed her in a position to
fall an easy prey to a seducer, in that case the very
smallest coin would be an ample compensation. The
Learned Sergeant then commented upon the evidence
of the servant girl, and urged that it was utterly un-
worthy of credit, particularly after the admissions she
had made that she said nothing about so important an
event to her master's honour and reputation until a
month after the transaction, and then only upon her
having a quarrel with her mistress. He also com-
mented upon the letter written by the defendant,
and contended that there was nothing in the case to
show that it was not written with the most pure and
proper intentions. His Learned Friend had talked
of the treachery and faithlessness of the defendant, but
it appeared to him that there was not the least evi-
dence in the cause whatever to show that the plaintiff
and defendant had ever been on the intimate terms
that were represented, and that this part of the case
entirely failed. He would tell the jury what were
the real circumstances of this unhappy transaction.
They had heard that Mrs. Case was an illegitimate
child. She had, however, been very well educated
and brought up, and at her marriage a handsome
provision was made for her. When the young lady
was only seventeen years of age, the plaintiff met
her by accident at a jeweller's shop, and entered
into conversation with her, and followed her home,
and applied to her friends to be allowed to pay his
addresses to her. They refused to sanction the con-
nexion, but clandestine interviews took place, and
in the result the plaintiff succeeded in seducing her,
and her:friends subsequently discovering that she was
in the family way, consented to her being married
to the plaintiff, solely with the view of saving her re-
putation, and although a marriage settlement was
made upon her, leer own friends never took any part
in the marriage proceedings, and not one of them was
present at the ceremony. The marriage was one of
unmitigated misery, and he should show that the con-
duct of the plaintiff had been of the most brutal de-
scription, and that he had on several occasions resorted
to personal violence. He also kept her without money,
and had taunted her with being illegitimate, and he
should show that so far from the plaintiff having any
right to ask for damages for the loss of the society
of his wife, his evident object had all along been to
drive her away from him and to get rid of her. The
Learned Sergeant then proceeded to detail other facts,
which he said he should put in evidence, and con-
eluded by expressing an opinion that when the jury
became acquainted with all the facts, if they should
be of opinion that the criminal connexion had been
established, they would at the same time feel that the
very smallest amount of damages was a sufficient
compensation to the plaintiff for any loss he had sus-
tained.
Mrs. Turner, the mother of Mrs. Case, was then
examined—She spoke to the circumstances of the
marriage, and said that the plaintiff and her daughter
always appeared to live unhappily, and she said she
did not believe they had enjoyed one moment's happi-
ness since they had been married. During the first
three months her daughter frequently complained of
her husband's conduct, and before the first fortnight
had elapsed she saw her in tears. Upon one occasion
the plaintiff pushed his wife out of the room, and
told witness to take her home, and he said he did not
want her.

When he was at home he would sit on

the sofa, and never speak a word to her, and in the
evening he would dress himself and go out, and not

come home till two or three o'clock the following
morning. Six months after the marriage shesaw her
daughter with a black eye, and witness had repeat-
edly interfered to prevent the plaintiff from striking
her, and he used repeatedly to swear and make use of
bad language to her. The plaintiff went away from
his wife in 1848, and witness went to his office

for some money, and he then told her
that he had kept her daughter for ten years, and
he ought to be paid for keeping her. Upon one oc-
casion her daughter showed her some marks upon her
back, and said they were caused by her husband beat-
ing her with a stick. lie left her again in 1842, and
again in 1844, and 1848, and the last time he was
away from her for four months, and he left her without
a servant and without money. Witness applied to him

I to return to her, but he said he would not, and that
she should turn out.
By Mr. CUAMBERS—Her -daughter was very
" nervous." She had never been struck by her, but
they had quarrelled invariably. Mr. Bailey was not
her father, but he had known her since she was two
years old, and took a great interest in her, and he had
settled some money upon her at her marriage. He
also provided the money to furnish a house for them
in Moore-place, Lambeth, but her daughter would not
go to live there. Her father was dead, but Mr. Bailey
had alvted her, and had been a very good friend to
her. B-,,f ire her marriage Mrs. Case was living as a
h ),irder with a person named Hart in Kennington-
green. At present she was staying with witness, and
Mr. Baker called upon them last week.
Frances Duncan said she had known the plaintiff
and his wife for nine years and a half, and she first
became acquainted with them by being neighbours as
the east end of the town. During the time she knew
them they lived miserably together, and the plaintiff
always treated his wife with indifference and con-
Mrs. Case appeared to be always a good wife,
and to conduct herself with great propriety. In 1840
they removed to Henry-street, Vauxhall, and witness
continued to visit them there for eight years, and it
appeared to her that the plaintiff treated his wife
worse than ever. He was almost always out, and
when he did coma home to dinner he would sit in the
room with his wife and never open his lips to her.
He would then dress himself and go out about nine
o'clock, and they would see no more of him until the
next morning. She once saw the plaintiff lay bold of
his wife's nose and slap her across the face, and he
made her lip bleed. Another time he threw a dish
cover at her. She had also heard him ask her why
she did not elope, and say that he should never come
after her whoever she went away with, and that she
was more fit for a mistress than a wife.
Sarah Ann Green, a charwoman, employed in the
family, gave evidence of a similar description. She
also stated that one evening, after they had had a
dispute about some coffee, the plaintiff seized his wife
by the throat, and the language he made use of at
the same time was most disgusting. She begged the
plaintiff not to kill his wife, and she got away from
him, and fell in a fit, and a neighbour, at her request,
got over the wall of the next house, and came to her
assistance. The witness also said that she had re-
peatedly heard the plaintiff call his wife a bastard,
and say that ber mother, her sisters, and her grand
mother, were all bastards.

By Mr. CHAMBERS-All this occurred in July,
1849. Mrs. Case used to go out, and did not return
home till ten or eleven o'clock at night, and her hus-
band quarrelled with her for stopping out. Upon
one occasion, when he asked her where she had been,
she said she had been to Mr. Bailey's, and he replied
that she was a liar, for he had inquired, and found she
had not. She was only in the service a couple of
months or so, and during that period the plaintiff
complained a dozen times of her stopping out at night.
Mr. John Owens, a butcher, residing next door to
the plaintiff, in Henry-street, proved that he and his
wife were heard frequently to quarrel and fight, and
that Mrs. Case repeatedly cried " Murder !"
Mrs. Jane Owens, the wife of the last witness, de-
posed to the same facts, and also said that upon one
occasion, when the plaintiff went away from his wife,
he left her without any resources, and she supplied
her with food from her own table.

Caroline Naylor deposed that she was in the plain-
tiff's service two years ago. He was in the constant
habit of using most disgusting language to his wife,
and once he threw a teacup at her in witness's pre-
sence, and cut her wrist with it. Mrs. Case's con-
duct always appeared to be very good; and she (wis-
ness) could only say her husband would not have had
such good usage from her.—(A laugh.) During the
eleven months she was in the service, she never knew
the plaintiff to stop at home one evening with his
wife. He never used to read to her, or do anything
to amuse her, but would lie upon the sofa and go to
sleep. He also used frequently to go by himself to
masquerades.

Mr. NORTON—In what character—was it Blue-
beard ?—(A. laugh.) Witness—l don't know what
character he took, but I know he used to go in cha-
racter, because I have seen dresses and false noses that
he used to wear.—(Laughter.).
Mr. CUAMBERS then addressed the jury in reply to
the case that had been set up for the defendant.
The CHIEF BARON summed up. He said he did
not think there could be any doubt upon the question
of adultery having been actually committed.—(The
jury intimated that they were satisfied upon that
point.) The only matter, therefore, that remained for
consideration was what ought to be the amount of da-
mages the plaintiff should receive. What then was the
case they had to consider? The plaintiff brought his
action for the loss of the society and affections of his
wife, and for this alone was he entitled to compensation ;
and he must say that it did appear vvery extraordinary
in the first place, that although a period of ten years
had elapsed since the marriage, no person should have
been brought forward by the plaintiff to speak to the
terms upon which he lived with his wife during that
period, and he could not help observing that it was
hardly fair for a plaintiff to keep back all information
of that kind, and, by compelling the defendant to call
the witnesses, obtain a reply. The jury should re-
collect that the object was not to puni,h the adulterer ;
but to recompense the injured husband for the loss he
had sustained, by having his wife's affections seduced
from him, and all they had to consider, therefore, was
what that loss really was. His Lordship then referred
to the principal points in the case, and concluded by
leaving it in the hands of the jury.
After a short consultation in the box the jury re-
tired, and in about a quarter of an hour gave a verdict
for the plaintiff—Damages, 2001.
The trial occupied nearly nine hours.

OXFORD ClRCUlT.—Gloucester, Aug. 13.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice Wm-

LIAMS.)
THE COALPIT HEATH MURDER.-SENTENCE OF DEATH.
[We brought our report of this trial up to the depar-
ture of the last train yesterday. We now conclude it.]
Ann Cohen deposed that she called at the prisoner's
house a few days after Christmas last. While she
was there, Edmund Curtis, the prisoner's present hus-
band, came, and he and the prisoner went out, and
were absent about a quarter of an hour. When the
prisoner returned, which she did alone, witness left,
and while going away saw Curtis enter the house, and
the door was closed after him. A short time after-
wards witness met Mrs. Curtis, who told her that her
then husband (Harris) was very jealous of her because
Curtis had been there. She added, " But ['ll let him
know about that." Her husband (Harris) was three
or four years older than the prisoner. Curtis was
younger than she was.

- The marriage of the prisoner with her present hus-
band, on the 26th of May, was then proved, and
W. Joyner Ellis, Esq., was called to prove that
llarris and the prisoner were married. Mr. Ellis
stated that in consequence of the rumours which
had been circulated to the contrary, he put the ques-
tion to the prisoner whether she had been married to
Harris, and she replied that she had. Witness
cautioned her throughout the investigation as to what
she said. It was at the adjourned inquest that the
prisoner made the statement that she was married to
Harris.

Mr. COOKE, for the prisoner, contended that such
evidence was inadmissible, but his Lordship ad-
mitted it.

Mary Ann Elliott, daughter of the prisoner, was
next put in the witness-box, but Mr. Greaves de-
clined to examine her. She was dressed in decent
mourning. Mr. Cooke put several questions to her,
in answer to which she said that she was the priso-
ner's daughter by a former husband, named Jen-
nings, and that she was married, but used to live
at her mother's occasionally, when out of service.
Lived on good terms with ilarris, and he with her
mother, except when he was in liquor, which was
frequently the case, and then he was quarrelsome.
Had heard of the cat getting into her mother's house
and eating the butter and meat, but never the tarts.
On the 19th of April deceased was sick, and the pri-
soner took some peppermint tea, which she offered to
him, but which he refused. The tea had a smell like
that of landanum. The deceased occasionally took
magnesia as a medicine.
Mr. Choi E then addressed the jury for about an
hour and a half, examining the evidence critically,
and contending that, although this was undoubtedly a
case of suspicion, the facts, as they had been given on
oath, were, as consistent with innocence as with guilt.
The question for the jury to decide was whether the
arsenic (which there was no doubt had been the cause
of death) had been administered to the deceased wil-
fully, for the purpose of destroying life; and, if so, by
whom. He contended that the suggestions made in
the evidence, that the poison had been administered in
tea and in wine, were not borne, out, the witnesses
stating that there were no appearances of sediment, or
any foreign substance, in the cup. Mr. Herapath, too,
had given his opinion that arsenic killed within 24
hours. But here the sickness had extended from the
19th April, before the prisoner had been proved to have
bought the poison at Mr. Morton's, until the 30th,
when the deceased died. The same symptoms were
apparent in the illness of the deceased on the 19th as
on the 26th of April. He suggested that the correct
version of the unhappy affair was that the deceased
(Harris) having been used to take magnesia) which
was kept in a particular buffet, bad unfortunately