The Sun.
London, England, 1842-03-28 00:00:00

MONDAY EVENING, MAIWII 2B, 1842.

(Mr. Bennett) wouldnot give any evidence in this case; he
should, therefore, depend on the evidence before him, and
the jury; and therefore he called upon the jury to be
careful that justice alone directed their verdict, and in
this case justice should be exercised with the coldness
of ice. He sought not to save his client from damages
but he hoped he would not be visited with damages to
an immoderate or unjust amount. He hoped to see the
jury extend to him that heavenly mercy which they all
hoped for in common ; but whatever their verdict
should be, he would bow with respect and submission to it.
Baron LEFROY charged the Jury. - He said the case,
as it now stood, was one so perfectly .for iihe consider-
ation of the Jury—was one so totally diVested of all
legal subtleties, that it would not be necessary for him
to detain thejury with any observations upon it. There
could be no doubt, if the jury believed the evidence, that
the plaintiff was in some measure accessory to his own mis-
fortune ; and if they did believe that, it ought to lessen the
amount of damages. It was alleged that he had been
warned of rumours. Another ground relied on by the
defendant's counsel was, that the defendant was not the
seducer, but the seduced. The only point they had be-
fore them on that was, that she sent her brother-in-law
to the theatre on the night of her elopement. If the
Jury believed that, it should go in mitigation of damages,
for her loss could not be so great to her husband as if
her character was irreproachable. The only remaining
topic with which he had to trouble the Jury was the
amount of damages. Probably they thought they should
give suitable damages ; but he should greatly violate his
duty if he did not tell the Jury that the damages should
not be extravagant.

The Jury retired at a quarter to eight o'clock.
The Counsel at both sides consented that the Registrar
should receive the verdict, and his Lordship retired.

never seen the bundle mentioned until the policeman I
came into the shop, that he had pretended to take them
up from a plaice near where she was standing in the
shop, but, in fact, he must have brought the bundle
in himself. She moreover' stated that she had missed
several things from her house when she returned from
the station, to which she was taken off by the policeman,
who had then ransacked the house with Reynolds.
The ALDERMAN said it was a Very singular business
altogether. He should discharge the prisoner, and
should recommend her to consult a solicitor, as to what
she ought to 610. The policeman was at liberty to go,
but he would have to explain his conduct to the Com-
missioner of Police, who would certainly investigate the
matter fully.
Mr. Tew, an official person connected with one of the
City Companies, waited upon Sir Peter Laurie for the
purpose of mentioning the particulars of a case in which
he, as one of the executors of his deceased father-in-law,
was proceeded against by a solicitor for the sum of 541.,
the amount of a bill of exchange which the deceased was
stated to have accepted. The friends and relatives of
the deceased were wholly ignorant of the existence of
any instrument of the kind, but the writing was so well
imitated, and the difficulty of contesting the point ap-
peared to be so great, that serious intentions were enter-
tained of payiz.g the bill, and he (Mr. Tew) had
no doubt that by this time the fictitious debt
would have been discharged if he had not
seen in the newspapers an account of the pro-
ceedings before Sir Peter Laurie on the subject of
the forged bill, which had been concocted upon view of
the wills in Doctors' Commons. He immediately after-
wards communicated with his solicitor, and the result
was, that the attorney, who had sued for the amount of
the forged bill, not only withdrew the action, but the
whole of the costs and expenses to which the executors
to the will had been put were paid. He felt indebted in
no small degree to Sir Peter Laurie for the money and
annoyance thus saved, and he had reason to suppose
that many other parties were under as great obligations
to the public spirit and incessant labour of investigation,
which distinguished that Alderman.
Sir P. LAURIE—I trust that the exposure has done a
great deal of good of the kind that has been rendered to
you. The system has been extensively carried on, and
by and by the public will hear more particulars. In the
mean time, it is proper to state that great facilities are
afforded at Doctors Commons to persons who commit
frauds of the sort. For a shilling a thief may look over
a will and copy the signature, or he may go at another
time, and compare any instrument he may choose to
draw up for the purposes of plunder for another shilling.
Nothing can be more easy than for a schemer, with a
good head up .n his shoulders—an article all these fel-
lows are provided with—to impose upon executors by
forged bills, in which the name of the testator is con-
cerned.
Sir PETER LAURIE said he had received a letter from
a Member of Parliament of high rank and fortune,
through the hands of a friend, to which he considered
it necessary to refer. That letter, after having spoken
of a professional person stated to be mixed up in the
disgraceful transactions recently exposed at the Mansion-
house, went on as follows I strongly suspect that he
is the same person whet a few months ago, brought an
experimental action against me in the Court of Queen's
Bench at the suit of a woman of the town, and after
putting me to an expense of 1501., never brought it to
trial. On my getting judgment and execution against
his client, and having traced her, I found that she had
robbed her lodgings and absconded." Now, there is no
class of then more dangerous than the abandoned vil-
lains of the law, and there were no persons whom he
should feel more gratification in holding up to public
ignominy and abhorrence than those who, knowing that
they had thieves for their clients, aided and abetted
them, and participated with them in their nefarious
profits.