The Sun.
London, England, 1850-07-13 00:00:00

as to procuring abortion. The defendant had been already
severely punished for laving forgotten his station and
mixed with such persons. Ile was obliged to pay 2s. 6d.
a week for the support of the child—he had this action
brought against him, and on the death of his mother
would he liable; according to the evidence given to-day,
to another for breach of promise of marriage. He would
prove that the plaintiff was a most profligate, a'ean-
doned character, and set such an example before his
children that it was impossible for them to have any
notions of virtue. He married a woman named Mary
Wyse, in 1807. After a few years he left her, and ran
off with the wife of a man named Springthorp, who
lived till 1823, when, on his death, his children came to
their mother, who was living with the plaintiff. Plain-
tiff's wife, Mary Wyse, died in 1838. The fruit of the
illicit intercourse with Mrs. Springthorp was two girls
and a boy. With such parents and such an example,
what must be the conduct of the children? The Spring-
thorps had had bastard children. The girl Anne he
would prove to have been a most abandoned character,
long before the defendant knew her. If he should prove
that the father so misconducted himself, and that this
girl was a lewd character before the defendant became
acq seinted with her, he was sure that the jury would
not give more than a farthing damages.
The marriage of the plaintiff with Mary Wyse, and his
running away from her with the wife of Springthorp,
and the death of Mary Wyse and Springthorp were then
proved.
William Wells, a servant of Mrs. Harford's, swore
that ho was at a dance at the plaintiff's four years ago;
that between twelve and one at night he went down to
the cellar for a pot of beer, and there raw one Frank
Agar with his hands up Anne Bristow's clothes.
In cross-examination he said he mentioned it that
night to his wife, and soon afterwards to a fellow-ser•
vent, George Rackley, who was now in town. Agar was
alive, and he had seen him since the meeting of the
justices at Maidenhead.
Charlotte Chapman, who lived in Clewer-lane, Wind-
sor, swore she saw Anne Bristow with a Life Guards-
man at Simpson's beer-house in Bescot-street in the
evening, about seven or eight months ago, and asked her
the next morning what made her look so ill, when she,
Anne, said she had not been home all night.
In cross-examination she said she never mentioned
this to any one till she saw Mr. Ward (defendant's at-
torney), last week.
Two frail sisters, of the name of Sorrell, were next ex-
amined, to prove that they had seen Anne Bristow with
a Life Guardsman at the house of Mrs. Goodchild, in
Clewer-lane, about eighteen months back. One, Sarah
Eliza, said he was known as "Jem," and had left Wind-
sor about twelve months. That she had been spoken to
by Mr. Ward prior ta the inquiry before the justices,
but did not attend the inquiry, and had not said she had
seen Anne with the Life Guardsman till to-day. The
other, Elizabeth, said he was not known by any name
that she knew of, and that she was first spoken to on the
subjects fortnight ago.
Hester Turner swore she had seen Anne about a
twelvemonth ago once speaking with a civilian and a Life
Guardsman.
This was the defendant's case.
Mr. Sergeant Jones, in his reply, characterised the
evidence adduced to impeach the character of the young
woman as rank perjury. Why were not Agar, Rackley,
Mrs. Goodchild, and " Jem" called ? Clearly because
they would disprove this tissue of falsehood. If the
plaintiff were guilty of irregularities in his youth, was
that to be a reason why his daughter might be se-
duced with impunity ? There was not a particle of
evidence to show that he had committed any irregu-
larities for the last thirty years. He trusted to the good
sense of the jury, and hoped that they would see the
true character of the evidence offered on behalf of the
defendant, and would give such a verdict as would warn
him from again attempting, after he had made a poor,
virtuous, innocent girl the dupe of his designing arti-
fices and want of faith, to blacken and blast her cha-
acter for ever, by the aid of lying worthless witnesses.
(The conclusion of the Learned Gentleman's address
was received with slight symptoms of approbation from
the audience.)
Lord CAMPBELL, in summing up, said the plaintiff
was clearly entitled to damages, and the jury would have
no difficulty in saying that they ought not to be nominal;
as he had been put to expense, and obliged to hire an-
other person to do the work that his daughter used to
do before. Another question, however, for their con-
sideration would be, whether the plaintiff was an honour-
able respectable man, and whether he brought up this
girl in the ways of modesty and virtue—whether she
was the victim of the artifices of the defendant, or
whether the plaintiff was not a person who had led a
vagabond life, and had set a bad example to his children;
and whether, independently of all connexion with the
defendant, she had not lost all character fur modesty and
virtue? The evidence against her character came from
a most suspicious source; and if the case on the part
of the plaintiff had been without much suspicion,
they ought not to pay much attention to that on the
part of the defendant. It -was his duty to call their
attention to the manner in which the plaintiff con-
ducted the beer-shop, and to ask them whether they
thought it possible that a man who allowed such scenes
as had been described there could have brought up his
family virtuously and modestly. Such dances were most
disgraceful and demoralising. God forbid that innocent
dances on the village greens should be interfered with,
they were innocent—not only innocent, but laudable
amusements. But what were the dances described here
—the house open all night—everybody admitted who
paid 15.—and at last came the cushion-dance, where all
sense of decency and propriety was thrown aside. It
seemed to him that the plaintiff, by tolerating and en-
couraging such scenes within his house, showed that he
did not care to conduct himself and his family along the
paths of innocence and virtue; and that that was the
very course of training which might well prepare this
young woman for going to Clewer-lane, and to Simp-
son's and Goodchild's. The d swages were entirely in
the hands of the jury, and he wished that they should,
in finding their verdict, act altogether on their own
judgment.
The jury deliberated for about ten minutes, and re-
turned a verdict for the plaintiff—Dam ,ges 401.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.

Before Mr. Baron ALDERSON, Mr. Justice PATTESON,

and Mr. Justice -TALYOUXD.)
Daniel Blackstalf Donovan, 33, smith, was indicted
,or the capital offence of casting and throwing Anne
Donovan out of the window of a dwelling-house, thereby
causing her a bodily injury dangerous to life, and with
intent to murder her.
I❑ other counts the prisoner was charged with cutting
and wounding the prosecutrix with the like intent.
Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Clarke conducted the prosecution,
by direction of the Commissioners of Police.
It appeared from the statement of the Learned
Counsel for the prosecution, and the evidence that was
adduced in support of it, that the prisoner and his wife,
who was the prosecutrix, resided at 19, Short's-gardens,
Drury-lane, and on the night of the 27th April they
returned home very much intoxicated. A quarrel
very soon afterwards arose between them, and the pro-
secutrix made use of some irritating language to the
prisoner, and he attacked her in a most savage manner,
and beat her with his fists, and also with a chair,
which he struck her with until it broke, and he then
continued beating her with one of the legs. The un-
fortunate woman ran to the window and called for help,
and according to the evidence of one of the children the
prisoner opened the window, and laid hold of her and
threw her into the yard, and by the fall she received
such fearful injuries that her life was for;a1;long period
in considerable danger, and she was at the present time
suffering considerably. It appeared in the course of the
case, that during the quarrel between them, the prisoner
when he was requested to desist from ill-using his wife,
said, that the only mercy he would show her would be
to "chuck " her out of the window, and it also appeared
that when he was asked to assist in taking her to the
hospital, the answer he gave was, that he would not.
The prisoner, in his defence, asserted that his wife
threw herself out of the window, but this was distinctly
negatived by the evidence.
The jury found the prisoner Guilty.
Baron ALneasoN ordered judgment of death to be
recorded, and he at the same time said he would recom-
mend his life to be spared. but no more.
Joseph Hillier and Edward Hawkes, two post letter
carriers, who pleaded guilty on Wednesday to charges of
stealing letters containing money and other articles,
the property of the Postmaster-General, were brought
up for judgment, and sentenced to be transported for ten
pears.
Mary Shipley, 48, widow, was indicted for the man-
slaughter of Sidney George Laming, an infant of ten-
der years, by not supplying him with proper food and
clothing, and also by exposing him to the inclemency of
the weather.
It appeared that the child in question was illegiti-
mate. It was born in October, and shortly afterward it
was attacked with a cold, and at the time it was placed
in the charge of the prisoner it was still suffeiing
that cemplaint. The prisoner was to receive five
shillings a week for nursing the baby, and its mother
m wasu
peawptaoii
t :ntatbhal goodl
yke
witness
acnhd
hwgeawatahalri
ongtl etaermcwoeaerlaas cispulti
required.
:oiwtedxpedadea
was to provide clothes for it. The child soon
afterwards became very much indisposed, and it
seemed that some woman who lived in the same
house with the prisoner had accused her of starving the
child; and it was represented that she was in a great
passion with them for so doing, and told them to mind
their own business, and declared that the doctor who
had recommended her to nurse the child had said that
she might kill it, or cure it, or starve it, or do just as she
pleased with it. The child died on the 14th of June;
s
always appeared to treat the
a ud upon
ascertaineda
but the immediate cause ,of death was inflammation of
postmortem that tl3eboedzya
the lungs, and there was no direct evidence of any kind
r
tcfme
food,
exa-
mined nsddl hde:donakwenisendat
oaya
nt
the it
as
it nnh wsde
ust
ffiso prisonerca
pi
contrary,t
ernao tvi
itdacceleratedaoel
sowisupport
Mr. Justice PATTESON expressed an opinion that the
in
the indictment, and
The jury, without any hesitation, returned a verdict
of Not Guilty.______