The Sun.
London, England, 1828-08-21 00:00:00

toT '

4.k‘:_"4; %1';
-41 it,

~~~

1 Yr- rit 11 • tlif
LAW lifißLLlGilget

SECONDARIES' OFFICE, Auc. 20.
CRIM. CON.
AUSTEN ESQ. V. WARES.
......

Mr. RYLAND opened the pleadings. The Jury
were to assess the damages to which the plaintiff
was entitled to recover from the defendant, for cri-
minal conversation with his wife. The plaintiff laid
his damages at 10,0001.
Mr. LAW stated the case. The plaintiff, Mr.
Austen, was a gentleman residing at Goadherst, in
Kent, of which county he had long been an active
Magistrate. He had formerly been an officer in the
army ; and the defendant was also a member of that
honourable profession, holding a lieutenant's com-
missiongßtr
aaveneegdtahlteoi
ends
an
nfahebenil
defendant
athiEatlimmstaea
intimacy
.od
pti aiipTaothrCompany's
ivancdityrlongc
oufmss
committinget
subsisted
cseiess,t eodn
e which
the
the-
offence of which he had been guilty, were to be
tween his highly estimable father, the , Rev. Dr.
Nares, and the plaintiff. Dr. Nares, with whose
high reputation as an author they were well acquaint-
ed, had a living in Kent, at Which he resided, near
the place of the plaintiff's residence, and their fami-
lies had been on terms of the greatest intimacy for
many years. he defendant was a young man
about 21 or 22 years of age, and had been some
years in India on military duty, from which country
he returned in May last year, for the benefit of his
health. The plaintiff had been married to a former
wife, by whom he had two children ; and in 1821
he married his present wife, who was then a widow
Springet, and had two children by her former hus-
band. This lady is much younger than the plaintiff,
but still of mature age, being now about 37 years.
The defendant, from the time of his return to Eng-
land, was a frequent visitor at the plaintiff's house;
but down to the very hour of . the elope-
ment, the conduct of the plaintiff's wife was unim-
peachable,—perfectly free from any appearance that
could excite suspicion ; and the conduct of the plain-
tiff towards her was that of an attentive and affec-
tionate husband. On the 31st of last October, on
pretence of going to pay a visit to the family of the
Rev. Mr. Cornwallis, in Seven Oaks, the plaintiff's
wife left home in a public stage, with her husband's
perfect approbation. Mr. Hay, a friend of the
plaintiff's, was in the stage-coach at the time, and
to his care he recommended her. She proceeded in
the coach as far as Tunbridge, when she told Mr.
Hay she would take a chaise to go to Mr. Corn-
wallis's, and left the coach apparently for that purpose.
She did take a chaise, but instead of going to Mi.
Cornwallis's she proceeded by another road towards
London, and was met by the defendant iH a chaise
which he had brought from London, and by him she
was brought to Fladong's hotel, in Oxford-street,
where he had taken lodgings the day before in the
name of Wait. There they remained but a short
time, during which they occupied the same bed-
chamber; and from thence they went to Margate,
where they lived together as man and wife, in a lodg-
ing-house, for eleven weeks, still passing by the name
of Wait. After the discovery of their retreat, the
parties no longer sought concealment, but proceeded
to Calais, where they lived together as man and wife
in the defendant's real name.
A copy of the register of the plaintiff's marriage,
on the Ist of August, 1821, was put in evidence.
Miss Aux Austen examined.—l am the plaintiff's
daughter by a former wife. I was present at his
marriage with his present wife, which took place at
St. Paul's, Covent-garden, the Ist of August, 1821.
I then went to live with them at Goudhurst, and
continued to reside there principally till Mrs.
Austen's elopement in October last. To the time
of Mrs. Austen leaving her husband, their demeanour
towards each other was tender and affectionate.

Dr. Nares's family was intimate with my father
for 30 years; they constantly visited in the most
friendly manner. I knew the defendant from a
child : he was always intimate at our house.
Cross-examined by Mr. ALEXANDER—My lathe
age is about 67 at present; the age of his second
wife at present is about 31: I never saw any thing
between them that was not tender and affectionate ;
there were differences of opinion sometimes, but
never any thing like a quarrel : I believe the de-
fendant is now about 22 years of age; he was in
India two years ; he had frequently visited at my
father's after his second marriage, before he went
to India.

Re-examined—l saw an unfinished letter in Mrs.
Austen's hand while the defendant was in India,
which she told me was for him. I should not have
known whom it was for had not she told me. She
used no concealment. There was nothing in her
conduct that called for reprehension.
Colonel Austen, examined by Mr. Lavv—l am
nephew of the plaintiff, and was in the habit of visit-
ing him from the time of his second marriage to the
time his wife eloped, generally three, or four, or five
times a week in winter. His conduct was that of is
tender and affectionate husband.
Elizabeth Higgins—l lived housemaid with 111 r.
Austen 11 years. I lived in the house from the time
of his second marriage till Mrs. Austen went away.
He was always kind and affectionate to her. She
was always kind and pleasant to him. Her conduct
was always that of a lady. Never saw any thing
different, to the time of her going away.
John Beresford, a waiter at Fladong's hotel, ill
Oxford-street, in October last stated, that the de-
fendant called on the 29th of October last, and asked
for apartments. He was not seen by the other
waiters. He chose a drawing-room and bed-chamber
on the same floor; there was a passage between. De-
fendant slept there on the 29th and 30th, and went,
as he said, to Seven Oaks in the morning—ordered
a dinner for himself and a lady, and returned between
five and six in the evening, with a lady. They
slept in the bed-room. Defendant said his name
was Wait. All but witness supposed they were man
and wife. They left the following day at dusk.
Mr. John Hay examined—Witness was acquainted
with Mr. and Mrs. Austen for some time. On the
31st October, he was a passenger in the Cranborne
coach to London. The coach stopped at Major
Austen's (the plaintiff's) house, and took up Airs.
Austen. Her husband attended her to the coach,
between 20 and 30
and said to witness he was glad to see him. Mrs.
Austen was going on the road as far as Seven Oaks,
and he would be much obliged to him to take charge
of her so far. He said she was going on a visit to
Mr. Cornwallis's, and Mrs. Austen begged her hus-
band to come and fetch her the following Saturday,
which he said he should do. The distance between
Mr. andAustenal'is4sa w Sevennosnore
Oak
miles. Before Mrs. Austen was long in the coach.
she said she thought she had changed her mind—
woulda take a chaise at Tunbridge, and go the cross-
road. She left the coach at Tunbridge, and ordered
a chaise at the Crown-inn. Witness went on by
ores is
her.
of
the coach, Austen is a woman of
c erabie
personal attraction.
Mrs. Johnson examined—Witness lives at No. 10,
Lower Marine-terrace, Margate. The defendant
„„d a lady came to her house on the 2d of Noveni-
ber, and lodged With her 11 weeks. They said
their name was 'Wait ; they used the same bed-
room, and desired her, if any one called, to say they
were not there. They
had
no servant; the lady she
would call a very good-looking woman.
By the Coutur—They lived while in her house
as man and wife.
Wm. Hazledine—Witness is a butcher at Gond-
hurst, and served the defendant and Mrs. Austen.
Went to Calais the Ist of April, to serve him with
process, and saw them walking on the public pier.
Mrs. Austen said to him, " Good God, 14azledine,
where did you come from ? I know your business ;
but you don't want to make any thing unpleasant
here. Come to the Crown Inn, and inquire for Mr.
and Mrs. Nares, and you will find us." Witness
went with them to the inn, and served the process.
This was the case for the plaintiff.
Mr. ALEXANDER addressed the Jury for the de-
fendant; after which the SECONDARY read over the
evidence, making observations as he proceeded, and
the Jury, after a short consideration, assessed the
damages at 1,0001.