The Sun.
London, England, 1850-03-30 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
NORTHERN ClRCUlT.—Licerpool, March 23.
(Before Mr. Baron RorsE and a Special Jury.)
NOLAN V. PETTIGREW.

This was an action of the case brought by the plains
tiff to recover compensation in damages from the de-
fendant, by reason of certain slander spoken by him
regarding the plaintiff. The declaration stated that
the plaintiff was a minister of a certain congregation
of Protestant Dissenters, meeting at a chapel called
Ducie chapel, in Manchester ; and that the defendant,
coetriving and intending to injure him in his good
name and reputation, and to bring him into scandal
and disgrace, said to one William Cox Ford the fol-
lowing malicious and defamatory words of and con-
cerning the plaintiff, in answer to a question from the
said William Cox Ford: —" I charge the doctor,
meaning the plaintiff, with adultery and fornication ;
the doctor seducing a young woman, who was in the
family way by him, and he gave her a prescription to
cause abortion, and she has been in a state of intense
suffering ever since, both in mind as well as body.
Doctor Nolan sent his own medical man to attend
her. Another female also was in the family way by
him, and I pledge myself to obtain the name of the
parties, and to procure an interview for you with the
young woman. Watch him narrowly ; let him be
got out of the chapel, and give possession to the trus-
tees, and you will see the chapel well filled again. '
The defendant pleaded, first, not guilty; secondly,
that the plaintiff, being a married man, had seduced
and committed adultery and fornication with one
Elizabeth Townley ; and had also seduced and com-
mitted adultery and fornication with one Elizabeth
Gilchrist, replicatio injura.
Mr. Martin, Q.C., Mr. Sergeant Wilkins, and:Alr.
Aspland, appeared for the plaintiff; and Mr. Knowles,
Q.C., and Mr. Overend for the defendant.
Mr. MAArrtN, in opening the case to the jury, said
that it required their most serious consideration, for
the charge against the plaintiff was that he had se-
duced two young women, and had given drugs to a
third to procure abortion, they being members of a
congregation of which he was the minister. The
plaintiff was appointed minister of Ducie Chapel,
Manchester, in 1838, which was a chapel of small
size, but having given extreme satisfaction, a new
chapel was bu It for him, which was opened in 1840,
and was vested in trustees, who are usually the most
respectable members of the congregation ; but dis-
putes arose respecting the trustees who were ap-
pointed, and also regarding the doctrine preached by
the plaintiff, which produced a feeling in the congre-
gation which was much to be lamented. The chapel
was, however, opened, and the plaintiff preached.
The same year, 1840, he married a Miss Bird,
daughter of Alderman Bird, of Manchester, and that
lady did not now believe one word of the aspersions
which had been cast upon her husband. In 1848
Alderman Bird died, and also his eldest son, and
in that year rumours of impropriety were spread
abroad, which were invest!gated and disproved.
Mrs. Bird, the mother-in-law, after the death of
her husband, purposed to go to the South of England,
and wishing her daughter to accompany her, the
plaintiff resigned his office in the chapel, which was
accepted; and a meeting was held of the whole con-
gregation, at which a resolution was passed, tendering
the thanks of the congregation to the plaintiff for his
services, temporal and spiritual, and wishing him
every blessing and mercy ; and yet, within nine
months of that resolution, some members of that con-
gregation aro here to put him on his trial for matters
which took place six years before. In June of the
last year the plaintiff was requested to come among
them again ; and Mrs. Bird, his mother-in-law, hav-
ing consented to remain in Manchester, he agreed to
he re-elected to the office which he had vacated. Dif
ferences then arose in the congregation ; a large ma-
jority, however, voted for the plaintiff; but that
election, not having been conducted according to the
trust-deed, another election had to take place, and
then all these slanders were set afloat. Notwithstand-
ing, the plaintiff was re-elected by a large majority, and
that being the case, he could not flinch from the inquiry,
for which he declares there is not the slightest founda-
tion ; and if they should be of opinion that they
were true, of course he would not be worthy to hold
the office a moment longer. But those charges having
been made last year, it was considered that an inves-
tigation ought to he made, and accordingly eight
gentlemen met for that purpose, and they informed
the plaintiff that he must give a pledge that lie would
take no steps to prosecute any persons who should
come forward to give evidence. This the plaintiff
thought hard, and asked who the witnesses were,
which was not stated. He then said he was ready to
give a pledge to that effect, if, in the event of any
single woman coming forward unsubstantiated, he
should be allowed to go into a court of justice. Upon
this the eight gentlemen declined to act, and the in-
vestigatien was discontinued. The defendant was
clerk to Mr. Loyd, the ba;olser at Manchester, and a
tn,,tuber of the congregation, and he stated that the
plaintiff laid seduced a young worn in, and then caused
her to take drugs to procure abortion ; and as it is
necessary, in order to constitute slander, that the
ch orge should be something which should constitute
an indictable offence, that, therefore, would he the
main question for them to try. [The Learned Counsel
then proceeded to read the libel and the pleas which
the defendant had p!aeed upon the record.] With
regard to Elizabeth Gilchrist, she was a Sund iy
school teacher and a member of the congregation
for some years, and was constantly in the habit of
receiving the sacrament from the plaintiff. In 1845
she had a serious illness, and was advised to go into
the country, but, when well enough, attended the
plaintiff's chapel ; and it was during this illness that
the attempt to procure abortion was alleged to have
taken place. In 1847, in removing from Manchester,
she received a letter of dismissal, in order to be ad-
mitted to another congregation, where she became a
teacher, and so conducted herself that, until Decem-
ber last year, she was considered by all to be a mo-
dest and virtuous young woman ; and yet now it was
asserted by the defendant that she was debauched by
the plaintiff six or seven years ago, and is to be drag-
ged into the witness-box—a young woman who has
been four years married, with three children, to be
produced before them to state that she had always
been a most virtuous girl. Her husband would come
forward to state that he believed in her fidelity, and
he would support her on this charge ; and when the
young woman was told of it, she said that she owed
it 'to her mother, and her husband, and to her-
self to meet the charges. Anti yet she was dragged
forward'by men who professed Christian principles.
The case was one of life or death to Doctor Nolan,
but they would hear the witnesses and judge for
themselves.
William' Cox Ford, examined by Mr. Sergeant
Wseetsis, stated that he lived at 131, Oxford-street,
-111:inchester, and is manager of a large boot. and
shoe establishment in Manchester. Is, and for about
fifteen months past has been, a member of the con-
gregition 'of Dude Chapel. Knew the defendant
Pettigrew, who is in the service of Mr. Loyd, the
banker. On the 30th of last June Dr. Nolan re-
signed. Witness was present at a meeting at which
Dr. Sidehottom presided. [Witness here had a book
shown him' in which there was a resolution inserted,
accepting of Dr. Nolan's resignation, and expressing
earnest good wishes in his behalf.] Witness was
present at a meeting for the re-election of plaintiff,
after a' requisition to him to become their minister
again. On the morning of the 24th of October, the
Thanksgivinie Day, met the defendant in Bridge-
street,• Strangeways. He spoke about plaintiff,
after the salutation of the morning, saying, "Do
you still support Dr. Nolan ?" I said, "Yes."
He replied, " What you are doing, I've no doubt you
are doing conscientiously, but you are supporting a
base, bad man?' I said, " Mr. 'Pettigrew, what is
it that you charge the Doctor with ?" His reply
was, "Adultery end fornication; he has seduced a
vittuoneyoung woman, and has given her a prescrip-
tion to cause abortion ; she has been suffering most
intensely, bath in body and mind—and the loss of
her immortal soul. In consequence, he has sent his
own doctor to attend her. Another female is in the
family-way by him, and was sent to Ireland to be
out of the way." I said, " Mr. Pettigrew, Ido not
dispute your word, but I do not believe your state-
ment." I said I must have the names of the parties,
the account from their own lips, dates, arid circum-
stances attending. His reply was, " I do not know
the names, but I will obtain them for you, where
they live (or where she lives), and their interviews."
He said that " their parents did not know it," I
said it was odd that their parents should know no-
thing about it. Has had an interview with defendant
since. 09 neither occasion has defendant given him
the name of either of' the parties referred to. On
one of them he said that " the young woman's depo-
sition was taken in writing, and witnessed by two
respectable persons." I asked if he could obtain me
a copy of it. He said he could. I said if he would
I would see that Dr. Nolan met the charge ; and if
he did not, I would place it on the church doors.
There was a committee formed on this subject. He
said, " Your church is cut off from the union, watch
him narrowly ; let the church be delivered up to the
trustees, and you will see that your chapel will fill."
On cross-examination by Mr. Kaowees, witness
.Said that he was not a deacon of the church. The
numbers attending before this occurrence were steady ;
they are now fluctuating. The greater part of the
trustees have let's the chapel. Witness bad known the
chapel about six months before he began to attend.
Had previously not regularly attended at any parti•
cular place of worship, but at different chapels, and
sometimes at the church. The testimonial presented
to Dr. Nolan was an ornamental timepiece, with the
inscription of " A testimonial of affection and respect
from. his congregation." Witness did not know that
that inscription was written by Dr. Nolan himself.—
(He was here shown a paper from which Mr. Knowles
bad midi and said the writing was that of the plain-
tif) Did not know whether plaintiff composed the

~t Q