The Sun.
London, England, 1844-07-26 00:00:00

1.1111:11ER ASSIZES.
ROME ClRCUlT.—Maidstone, July 25.

CIVIL SlDE.—(Before Mr. Baron I'AiKE and a Spe-
cial Jury.) .
CRIM. CON.-KING V. NIINN.

This was an action brought to recover compensation
in damages for the seduction of the plaintiff's wife by
the defendant.

Mr. Sergeant Shee and Mr. Bovill were for the plain-
tiff; Mr. Platt, Mr. Sergeant Channell, and Mr. Peacock,
appeared for the defendant,
Sergeant SnEE addressed the jury, and said he had the
' honour to appear for the plaintiff, who sought their assist •
ante to relieve himself from a load of shame and dis-
honour too great to be borne, and to which no man
ought to submit. In form he asked them for damages
fur the seduction of his wife, but he would at the onset
inform the jury that damages were not so much an object
as that he might be enabled to found au application to
the Legislature upon their verdict, to dissolve a con •
flexion which he felt, after what had occurred, could
only henceforward be a source of misery and disgrace;
and that the friends of the plaintiff would be satisfied
that it was not a frivolous charge, and that he was well
entitled to the relief he sought for. The Learned
Counsel said he should now infot m the jury of the cir
curnstances under which the action was than&
against the defendant. The plaintiff had carried on,
with his brother, a very extensive business, as a
wine-merchant and grocer, in the town of Abing-
don, in Berkshire ; and he lived in that town in a posi-
tion of the highest respectability. At the time of the
marriage with his present wife he was about forty-eight
years old, and a widower, his first wife having died
about ten years ago. He admitted that in his con-
nexion with the lay now in question he had evinced
some little indiscretion, but this would not, in any
way, be an excuse for the conduct of the defendant.
Three years ago the plaintiff became acquainted
with the lady whom he now had the misfortune
to call his wife. . She was the widow of a
small tradesman at Birmingham, and her position in
socio- was certainly not equal to that of the plaintiff.
He, however, nes struck with her beauty and manners,
and after a short court'hip, he proposed himself as her
husband, and was accepted. He was aware that the
connexion would not be a satisfactory one to his friends,
and the marriage was therefore solemnised in private, at
All Souls' Church, Marylebone, no one being
present but the clerk, and a young woman, a
stranger to both parties, who were requested to for-
mally witness the marriage. Afrer it had taken place the
plaintiff and his wife proceeded to Hampshire ; and in
one short month, the film fell from the plaintiff's eyes,
and he found that he had been seduced by the beauty
and accomplishments of the lady to enter into a con-
nexion, which it was impossible, from the violent temper
of the lady, could produce happiness. At this time there
was not the slightest imputation upon her chastity;:but.
Mr. King found that his wife had such a violent temper,
that it was impossible for him to live with her. He was,
hoWever, stilt attached to her, and hoping that in
time .he might be able to renew the conuexion, a
deed of separation was, drawn up, in which he agreed
to allow his wife 501. per annum, but which deed, at
the same time also contained a proviso, referring to the
probability of their being together again, in which case
the annuity was to cease. After the separation, the
plaintiff returned to Abingdon and resumed the business
which he had given up on his marriage taking place,
and very soon afterwards he received information
which induced him to believe that the conduct of his
wife was not what it ought to be. and that an occur-
rence had taken place which would prevent him from
ever again thinking of living with her, or treating her
as his wife. The Learned Counsel then proceeded to
say, that after Mr. King had returned to Abingdon, his
wife went to live in Provilence-row, New Kent-road,
near which place the defendant carried on the busi-
ness of a cigar dealer, and he had also a coachmaking
establishment in the Westminster-road. He should
show that at this period they were intimate, but there
was no proof of any criminality. however, after this
the intimacy increased, and he apprehended there
would be very little doubt, after the evidence he should
lay be"ore them, that, criminal intercourse did
eventually take place between the wile of the
Vaintiff and the defendant, who, he should inform them,
was a married man and had a family. He should show
them that the defendant had engaged a public-house,
called the Shades, near the Corn Exchange for the
plaintiff's wife, whom he represented to be a widow,
and acts of gross indecency would be proved to
have taken place at that house, which could leave
no doubt of the guilt of the parties. He should be
also able to prove similar proceedings in other places,
and he felt satisfied the Jury would say that the
plaintiff was entitled to their verdict. The next ques-
tion would be that of the amount of damages, and al-
though he admitted it was not a case calling for heavy
damages, yet he did expect substantial damages from
the defendant, who, there could be no doubt, had in-
flicted grievous injury upon the plaintiff. Witnesses were
called who fully confirmed the statement of Counsel.
Mr. PLATT then addressed the jury, and observed that
it was now his duty to make some observations to them
on behalf of the defendant, who, he must say, was placed
in that position under very extraordinary circumstances.
his Learned Friend, in his addle's to them, evidently
felt that he was in a difficult position, and that he could
not hope to raise much sympathy for his client, and it
was pretty clear that the case would not admit,• of it.
Did the jury ever hear of such an extraordinary mar-
riage as the one that..-liattlien spoken to? The plain-
tiff first induced his wire to consent to a private mar-
riage, and then took ln r to the church, and had the
marriage solemnised in the presence of the clerk and
a woman, both of whom were perfect strangers to
them ; and then, almost the very next fact in
the case, was the deed of separation, about a month after-
wards. Why did not the plaintiff take his wife home to
his own house, and treat her as his wife ? What expla
n'ition had been given for his not doing so ? In general,
in cases of this description, some evidence was given of
the manner in which the parties had lived together,
but here all was a black, and the jury were left to form
their own conclusions upon the subject ; and he submit-
ted, that fir All that appeared to the_ contrary in the
ca=e, the marriage had never been consummate d. The
eject of the present proceeding was evidently to
enable the • plaintiff to get rid of hiS wife,
and to cast her upon. the world without any resources
after having solemnly made her his wife The Learned
Counsel weld on to say that it was amusing to see the
terms of the declaration which charged the defendant
with seducing the wife of the plaintiff, and depriving
him of the comfort, society, and assistance of his wife,
but, in point of fact, he had never received any of
these enjoyments. He had certainly married her,
but he did not take her home, or introduce her to his
friende, or treat her as a wife ; and after a month
had elapsed, and his passion was :probably gratified,
he turned her off with a miserable pittance of 501.
a year, which he must have well known, was inadequate
to her support. The plaintiff was a man forty-eight
years old, and that was surely a time of life when a
man knew what. he was about. He had- married
that lady deliberately, and now he sought to get
rid of her, for that was clearly the only object of the
present action. lie turned her from him with a
miserable pittance of 501.—not enough for her support,
without any protector, and he had then no doubt caused
her to I e watched, in order to get up a case against
her. Ile submitted that there was no evidence of
adultery having been committed, and he said
that the defendant was not proved to have done
more than almost any other man would for an un-
protected woman. If the jury should, however, think
that there was sufficient evidenCe to justify them in
finding a verdict for the plaintiff, he was quite sure that,
under the circumstances, they would consider the lowest
coin of the realm a sufficient compensation. for the injury
he had received.

Mr. Baron PARKE having summed up,
The jury, after a short deliberation, found for the
plaintiff—Damages, One Shilling.

SPIRIT GI the PUBLIC JOURNALS.
IRON THE EVENING PAPERS OF THIS DAY.
GLOBE.—There is no defeat of the present Government
which we:have witnessed with more satisfaction than that of
the " holier than- thou" Mr. Gladstone, in the matter
of Sunday thir&clasa railway trains. Trains ought either
to be permitted to run at all on Sundays—or they ought not.
If there should be no Sunday trains, we need not an Oxford
logician _to tell us there should be no third-class ones, But,
if first and second-class trains should run on Sundays, a
fortiori should third-class trains. We shall endeavour to
show this to the satisfaction of a student of Aldrich (who
would do well to stutly- Wheatly). Those who are truly at-
tached. (among whiim we beg to rank ourselves) to Lord's-
day observance, admit—such of them as admit the pro-
priety of sanctioning Sunday trains—that there are cases
in which Sunday travelling may be a work of necessity
or mercy. How can that plea be less applicable to third
than to first or second-class travellers? Nay, how can it
fail to be applicable more frequently to the former than the
latter—first, in proportion to the larger constituency of whom
they are representatives—and secondly, in the ratio of their
more frequent and urgent occasions? rAnd why, when some
errand of necessity, or mercy, occurs to the poor man,
should he be supposed abler to pay a second-class fare
than at other times ? Nay, how should he be sup-
posed otherwise than less able for extra expenditure?
It will be observed that we have taken the narrowest
ground in favour of the decision of the House against Mr.
Gladstone. Wa have talopted our argument to the scruples
of the most scrupulous Sabbath observers. Perhaps a larger
necessity and a larger mercy might have been pleaded for
the case of pent artisans and their families in the town
labvrintha of daily toil. How‘ver, we have no occasion to
argue that question at present. The running of Sunday rail-
way trains was already a forgone conclusion. The sole point in
dispute was, whether theiraccommodation should extend to the
poorer classes. That point the House of Commons, creditably,
to itself, carried against the Government. We have no disposi-
tion to ascribe oppressive motives to Mr. Gladstone or his col-
leagues. We regard him as the smooth shopman, who dis-
plays their assortment in the church-line to the beat advan-
tage. Neither do we charge him with insincerity in his recom-
mendations of it. Recent police reports have brought to light
a practice existing in the drapery lined what is called shaving
the ladies, and receiving a,,,per centage from employers for so
doing. That Mr. GlAdSione "shaves the ladies," and the
lady-like portion of the public, from any other than the most
orthodox motives, we do not for one moment believe. That
wicke I wit, Sydney Smith, is said to have once accused
him of " rather a retail manner." But we entirely ac-
quit him of retail practices. We believe he repre-
sents with good faith official religion—or what is left of
it. Believing Mr. Gladstone honest in his scruples,
we believe him feeble and vacillating in his mind. What a
point, to be sure, to court defeat upon, for the orthodox organ
of a strong Government. Mr. Gladstone thinks that work-
ing men would rather travel on Saturday than break into
Sunday. We dare say they would, if they could s.frord to
lose the time, and to lose the pence. We have already said.
however, that we will not enter into the general question of
Sunday travelling. We only denounce the inconsistency
(of which the House showed its sense by. its vote) of treating
first and second-class trains as good; and denoUncingonthird-
class Anathema Maranatha.
STANDARD.—The narrative of the progress made to-
wards the suppression of the slave-trade, last night, given
by the Earl of Aberdeen with so much clearness .aad
so little pretension, will highly gratify the people of
this country and the Christian community throughout