The Sun.
London, England, 1844-04-10 00:00:00

OUTRAGE UPON A MARRIED
LADY.

HERTFORD, APRIL 9.—Jamcs Bill, a young married
man of respectable appearance, and who, till within a
few days, filled the situation of clerk, at the Ware station
of the Nor:hern and Eastern Railway company, was in-
dicted at the Hertfordshire Quarter Sessions yesterday,
for an ussault upon Jane Ralph, wife of Mr. William
Ralph, clerk at the St. Margaret's station, on the same
line, with intent to commit a rape. Another count in
the indictment charged the prisoner with a common
assault.

Mr. and Mrs. Ralph had been on terms of close inti-
macy with the prisoner and his wife, and had frequently
visited at each other's houses. Mrs. Ralph, at the time
of the commission of this outrage, which has cost Bill
both his character and liberty for some time to come,
was very near her accouchernent, and this circumstance,
together with the fact of the assault having been perpe•
trated in open,,daylight and in Mr. Ralph's own house, has
caused a very strong sensation in the neighbourhood.
It may be proper to state that when the prisoner was
apprehended and brought before the magistrates, one
of the justices present expressed an opinion that the
case might be summarily dealt with, but his colleagues
formed a more serious estimation of the offence charged,
and conceived it their duty to send the matter before a
jury. The prisoner was accordingly committed for trial,
but liberated on finding sufficient bail for his appear-
ance at the sessions. The nature of the outrage, and the
circumstances under which it took place, will be found
detailed in the subjoined evidence.
Jane Ralph—l live at Stanstead, and am a married
woman. About two o'clock on the afternoon of the 25th
of March I was in my bed-room, in my own house. I
heard the house door open, and Mr. Bill came in. He
walked into the sitting-room in the first instance. I
went to the bed-room door, and he asked me if my hus-
band was in. I replied that he was not. He then in •
quired when he would be in, and I told him about half-
past two. I went back into the bed-room, and Mr. Bill
followed me. He took hold of me and threw me upon
the bed. He used his hands in a very indelicate man-
ner. I called out, and told him I would tell my husband.
I resisted him with all my might. I then got from the
bed, but he continued his rudeness. I did not rise from
the bed by his wish or consent, but by my own strength.
I then went and sat down in the sitting room. I was
crying very much, and I said I would tell my husband.
The prisoner begged I would not do so. I told him
that he had hurt me very seriously, and he said he hoped
not, but that he would come the next evening, and see
how I was. I told him that he was not to come there
again, for I said he was a great villain. He requested
me not to cry, and repeated his hope that I was not
hurt. He did not expose his person. I told my husband
what had happened the moment he came in, which was
very soon after. Bill had previously left the house.
Cross-examined by Mr. I land—l never expressed
any disinclination to appear against the prisoner. It
was thought that, being so near my confinement, it
would be better to have the matter settled, as my having
to undergo the painful necessity of appearing in Court
might be productive of injury to my health. I have
been :very friendly both with Mr. and Mrs. Bill. We
often used to visit each other. lam quite sure that the
first time I saw Mr. Bill, on the 25th of March, was
when he came into my bed-room. My husband is clerk
at St. Margaret's station, and Mr. Bill was clerk at the
Ware station. A pilot engine came up to St. Margaret's
station just before this occurrence took place. When
Mr. Bill threw me upon the bed I screamed out as loud
as I could. There are two cottages near to the house
we live in. They are about twice the distance I now
stand from the prisoner, ten or eleven yards. Both cot-
tages are inhabited. Sometimes there are many persons
loitering about the station, but I cannot say whether
that was the case on the afternoon of this day. I did
not go out of the huuse when the pilot engine came up,
nor had I been out shortly before. I was too much hurt
to observe whether Mr. Bill exposed his person, but, to
the best of my belief he did not.
This was the case for the prosecution.
Mr. Ryland addressed the jury for the prisoner.
The Noble Chairman, in his observations to the jury,
left it for them simply to say what, in their opinion, the
object of the prisoner, in going to the house of Mr.
Ralph, was—whether he really intended the commission
of a rape, or only the indulgence of so much impropriety
as would constitute a common assault.

The jury, after a short deliberation, returned a verdict
of Guilty on the second count, being for the minor of-
fence charged. _ _

Mr. Ryland then said that, with reference to the ver-
dict, he had not called witnesses, because such a course
would have been inapplicable; but with reference to
whatever sentence the court might think proper to pass,
he should call witnesses to character.
The Chairman—Very well.

The Learned Gentlonian called the following witnesses:
Mr. Frederick Clark—l have been superintendent of
one of the principal stations on the Northern and Eastern
Railway. I have known the prisoner three years and
a half. During that period his character, as a moral,
well-behaved young man, has always been very good.
Mr. John Staples—l am a coach proprietor. I have
known the prisoner for two years and a half, as a clerk at
the station at Ware, and formerly at Broxbourne. So
far as I have heard and known him, his character for
morality and proper conduct has been good.
Mr. Richard Allen—l am a coal-merchant. I have
known the prisoner more than two years. His character,
during that period, for morality and propriety of conduct,
I have always considered to be perfectly correct.
Mr. John Shepherd Matthews—l am a maltster at
Ware. I have known the prisoner six mouths. I have
seen nothing whatever in his character of an improper
tendency.
Mr. George Hainsley—l am- a plumber and glazier at
Ware. I have known the prisoner six months, and have
visited him repeatedly. I have always considered his
character as very good.
At the conclusion of the examination of these wit-
nesses, the Magistrates conferred together, and in the
course of a few minutes,
The CHAIRMAN, addressing the prisoner, said—You
have received a very good character from the persons
who have known you, I am given to understand that
you have already lost your situation, in consequence of
this transaction, and under these circumstances, the sen-
tence of the Court will be much milder than it would
otherwise have been. The sentence is, that you be im-
prisoned for the space of six calendar months.