The Sun.
London, England, 1842-08-24 00:00:00

CIVIL SIDE.-COLLINS V. TOGIIILL.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff against
the defendant for the seduction of the plaintiff's
daughter.
Mr. Sergeant Bompas and Mr. J. Smith were for
the plaintiff; Mr. Cockburn and Mr. Stone for the
defendant.

Mr. Sergeant BOMPAS opened the case, by stating
that the defendant had commenced his solicitations of
the plaintiff's daughter so far back as six years ago,
when she was only fourteen years of age. She was
then, it was said, a servant at Mrs. Hosier's, who kept
a lodging-house, where the plaintiff and a lady that
was called his wife came to live. Of this conduct on
the part of the defendant, the daughter informed her
parents, and she was then removed from Mrs.
Hosier's. She afterwards went into other situations,
then learnt the trade of shoe-binding, then went into
service again, and for some time past had worked at
the trade she had learned at her father's house, who is
a journeyman shoe-maker, residing in this city.
During all this time, the defendant was represented
to have frequently met her, and solicited her to come
to his counting-house, he being a merchant, and
having a counting-house on the quay. To these soli-
citations she at length yielded, and then it was she sur-
rendered to the defendant's wishes. This intercourse
was kept up for nearly three years, and the result was
a child, which was born some time in the last
month.

Emma Collins, on being called, confirmed the state-
ment that had been made by the Learned Sergeant
in opening the case. But upon cross-examination she
admitted that the amount of the plaintiff's conduct to
her at Mrs. Hosier's was that he kissed her two or
three times, and told her to keep the change of the
money that had been given her to purchase beer. She
also admitted that the defendant had simply asked her
when he had met her in the street to meet him, and
there did not appear in the defendant's conduct to have
been any arts made use of to induce the girl to comply
with his wishes. But the most unfortunate admission
for the plaintiff's case was that the defendant was not
the first person whom she had known intimately. She
admitted that a young man, under promise of mar-
riage, had gained possession of her six months before
the defendant did. The father had also said, when he
had seen the defendant after the birth of the child,
that there was no ground to charge him with the
seduction of his daughter. The defendant had offered
to pay the expenses and keep the child.
Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN suggested, that as there
could be no pretence in this case to charge the de-
fendant with the seduction of the girl, and as those
terms had been offered, it would be better to agree
upon what the expenses were, and take a verdict ac-
cordingly.
The Learned Counsel, however, could not agree
upon the terms, and the consequence was that Mr.
Cockburn addressed the Jury for the defendant, who,
after hearing the remarks of the Learned Judge
upon the case, returned a verdict for the plaintiff—
Damages, 101.
Twenty-three causes have been got rid of to-day,
so that it is very probable that the whole of the cause
list will be finished before the end ®f this week.