Star.
London, England, 1810-08-04 00:00:00

LAW lIVTELL7GENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, AUGUST s.
CRIM. CON WILLSIIEN.
Mr. Gaanow stated that this action was brought
for damages, to compensate the Plaintiff for the se-
duction
of his wife The circumstances were short
wad plain. The Plaintiff was a carver and gilder in
Long-acre ; he had been a widower previously to his
marriage with his present wife, and had children. In
about a year and a half after the death of his wife he
married the person whose misconduct had now de-,
prived him of the comforts and advantages of the
married life. The Jury would perhaps be told that
the loss of those comforts was not a fit object
for large compensation at their hands. The Plaintiff
was in a humble station of life, and it might be sup-
posed that the injury done by the seduction of a
poor man's wife was not worthy of large compensa-
tion ; but more mature reflection would convince the
Jury that, to a man in the Plaintiff's circumstances,
the injury was of the greatest magnitude. In the
higher ranks the loss of matrimonial comforts was but
the loss of one among a multitude of those enjoy-
ments which their rank put within their possession ;
it was scarcely more than an injury to feeling, and
the hurt of mind was almost the only thing that called
for compensation—it was not ruin to their happiness ;
it was not confusion to their domestic arrangements ; '
it was not the subtraction of those affections, which
not merely formed almost the only solace of a poor
man's estate, but largely assisted in the mutual la-
bours for mutual prevision. The Defendant was a
gold-beater, and a man of great opulence in his bu-
siness. He saw the Plaintiff's wife, who was then a
modest and repectable woman. He waited on the
plaintiff, and offered to supply him with the gold-leaf
which was necessary for his trade. The Plaintiff was
glad to deal with a man who cou!d serve him so ad-
vantageously. The Defendant called frequently at
the shop, and when he found the Plaintiff there spoke
of business ; but the Plaintiff was more frequently at
the top of the house, working at his trade. Mr. Will-
sign then took his opportunity of ingraciating himself
with his wife; he succeeded in his object, and made
assignations, sometimes without and sometimes within
the house. The favourite retreat was the back par.
lour, which had a door into she shop, and to the
stairs. Those doors were glazed and curtained ; the
curtains were let down during Mr. W.'s visit, and
-what passed there was only to be conjectured. At
length the servant girl, who had lately come from
the country, suspected some of the occurrences.—
** This," said Mr. Garrow, 46 arose, as I conceive,

merely from the sense of the impropriety which ser-
vant girls are always supposed to have." The side
of the green curtain was one day casually drawn away
while the parties were in the parlour, and the facts
discovered thereby, which were the ground of the
present action.
Mary Atherton, the Plaintiff's sister, was called to
prove the marriage of the Plaintiff to his present wife,
and the apparent happiness in which they hived toge-
ther.
Jane Duff deposed, that she had been acquainted
.with Mr. and Mrs. A. and very intimate with them.
It always appeared to her, that they lived very hap-
pily together.
Mrs. Moir deposed to the same effect ; and added,
that she always had, till now, believed )Airs. Atherton
to be a very decent, good woman.
A host of witnesses were brought forward to speak
as to the happy manner in which the plaintiff and his
wife were wont to live heretofore. _

Among others, appeared the landlord of the house
in which the plaintiff resided, who, with other circum-
stances, stated, that he one day met the defendant,
while the plaintiff was in prison for debt, he having
been somewhat unfortunate, who said to witness, after
some conversation about the imprisonment, " Ather-
ton is in my debt ;" '6 And, added witness, " his
wife (plaintiff's wife) owes me for ren'." "If that
be the case, (said the defendant) why don't you take
it out ?" thereby significantly hinting at the plaintiff's
wife.

Hannah Gibbons depcsed, that she was servant to
the Plaintiff soon after his marriage in 1807. The
Defendant, she said, came to the shop soon after that
period, erst under the pretence of business, but after-
wards came very often to see her mistress, in the
absence of Mr. Atherton, her master. He almost
always contrived to come when her mistress was sit-
ting in a little parlour, which overlooks the shop, and
when the master was either cut or up stairs attending
to his business, and he used to go into the parlour to
her. When they were so together the door used to
be shut and locked, and the curtains to the glass-door
leading into the shop, were invariably drawn, whoa
they wire so together, owing to which precaution
witness could never see what was passing, when the
parties were so tete-a-tete. She remembered once at-
tempting to go into the parlour when the defendant
and the plaintiff's wife were there, with the curtains
drawn as usual, but found the door locked. She
likewise remembered that the defendant once knocked
at the street door, and then ran over to the opposite
side of the way, where her mistress saw him, who af-
terwards having dressed herself, went to him, and
walked away with him. . The witness never saw any
thing criminal between the defendant and the plain-
tiff's wife; she only saw those strongly suspicious cir-
cumstances that she had related.
Sarah Smith deposed, that she had not long been
from the country, and had lived with the plaintiff as
servant since last Lady Day. She had often noticed'
the defendant coming to the shop, invariably inquir-
ing for her mistress, whom when he saw, they went
into the little parlour at the back of the shop, taking
the precaution of locking the door and drawing the
curtains. She remembered the defendant once corn-
ing to see her mistress, who was in the parlour, while
witness was washing the yard. Her mistress imme-
diately came to her, and told her to take the pail and
water and go and scour some other part of the house,
and she immediately obeyed her orders. Witneas
then went to scour the passage, and when there, she
observed the defendant looking very hard at her
through the glass door leading from the parlour. He
shortly afterwards drew the curtains, but did not
draw them so as to prevent the witness from being
able to look into the parlour, for a small space of the
, was left uncovered, so
opportunity, which she em.
parlour without being oh-
into the parlour? sho saw

the defendant and plaintiffs wife on the sofa, in a si. '
tuation which could only be properly allowed to a 1
husband. She looked for some time, and saw that i
take place wfiich she conceived to be criminal.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL, after asking a few ques-
tions of the witness, tending to draw her into an ac-
knowledgment that she had rather imagined than seen
the circumstances, addressed the Jury in mitigation.
No epic poem was ever more precisely constructed
according to the rules of Aristotle, than the episode
of this action of Crim. Con. The friends of the hus-
band had been paraded in due form, _to make ha-
rangues on the happiness of the married couple.—
Then came the prating landlord to whine about
Atherton's distresses; and then came the girls, whose
delicacy was brought forward with the full discovery.
It was not denied that the defendant was guilty, but
the Jury, in punishing a crime which no honest man
would mean to defend, should be cautious of making
the punishment a premium. A verdict must go for
the plaintiff, but the Jury would feel that the loss of
such a woman, as the plaintiff's wife, was scarcely to
be considered as an injury. In a month after her
marriage, she admitted the attentions of Mr. Will-
shen, and her whole conduct was that of a woman
whose virtue was as dubious as her affections were
without value.

Lord ELLEMBOROUGH —The action complains of
loss of comforts in society ; but this woman was only
waiting for seduction. She invited its she went out
on a signal from a man in the open street, who called
at her house as if it had be a common brothel.—
The expressions which Willshen used to the landlord
shelved the idea which her glaring conduct made on
him, and would have made any one form of her. The
damages ought to be moderate. Adultery w:l3 a most
pernicious crime, and it- ought to be punished ; but
in the present instance the Jury would consider, while
they compensated the injury of the husband, that they
were only to estimate it as the loss of a wife, who was
little better than a common woman of the town.

Verdict for the plaintiff—Damages £lOO.

SELLING OF GUINEAS.-TILE KING V. DE TONGS.

This was an action on an indictment for exchasg-
ing a quantity of guineas for more dun their current
value.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL stated, that by the acts
.sth and Gth Edward VI, if any person changing gold
coin, gave or received more than the value, as settled
by proclamation, such person was liable to fine and
imprisonment. By the proclamation of George I.
bearing date December 22d, 1717, the value of the
guinea was settled at one pound one shilling. The
object of the present prosecution was, to stop the
traffic of carrying gold out of the country into foreign
lands. It had become of late a prevalent practice
eo collect guineas, and sell them at a premium, to be
carried abroad. The defendant was a great dealer
in that line. The masters of foreign vessels were re-
gularly directed to him, and the traffic. was carried
on with all the formaiity of a legitimate commerce.
This attracted the notice of the official persons, who
were employed to prevent such abuses. The Solici-
tor of the Mint sent two persons to purchase gold :
they addressed him as foreigners : De Yonge recog-
nized their introductions, as from a man to whom he
h:id already sold guineas. De Yonge sold what
quantity was demanded to those persons : he was
ii-
nally arrested ; and the money, which had been given
for the guineas, was found in the house. There could
'be no doubt of those facts, and the Jury must find
the defendant guilty.
Mr. Leonard, from the Counsel office, produced,
the Gazette of the 22.1 Deccem ber, 1717, containing
the proclamation.
Mr. NIaRRYATT, as Counsel for the defendant, ob-
jected to it as proof, as the indictment set out that it
was proclaimed under the Great Seal, and there was
no proof that the proclamation in the Gazette had
the Great Seal aflized to it.

Mr. ATTORNEY-GENERAL was happy this objection
had been taken, for it was impossible that the Sove-
reign could issne a proclamation without its passing
under the Great Seal.
Lord ELLENBOILOUOIL—I am convinced that the
proclamation published in a Gazette, authorised by
his Majesty, is sufficient proof, and we are not at this
day to doubt that proclamations do not go under pro-
per scrutiny. It is the only mode the Sovereign has
of communicating his wishes to his people. I am con-
vinced that the Gazette is good evidence of the ex-
istence of the proclamation.
Mr. ATTORNEY-GENERAL.--My Lord,- I have got
the original proclamation, with the Seal affixed to it,
in Court ; but I wished it to be laid down by your
Lordship, that the Gazette wa3 good evidence, that
it might act as a precedent in other places •Nhere
they have not the advantage of your Lordship's pre-
siding.
Mr. Edward C. Powell deposed, that he was As-
sistant Solicitor to the Mint ; that from some infor-
mation which came to the office, he gave instructions
to two men, of the names of Caul and Nash, to pro-
ceed to the defendant's house, on the 26th of Decem-
ber last, and purchase some guineas. In order the
better to disguise themselves, they both spoke the
Dutch language. Caul was to urform the part of
a Dutch Supercargo, who could not speak English ;
and Nash to act as his interpreter. He gave Nash
£59 in Bank of England Notes, which he took an
aceount of, and made Nash examine them with him ;,
he also gave him two Bank of England Dollars,
which he snarked. They went to the defendant's
house; lie attended in a coach at no great distance
off, accompanied by a person of the name of Browne,
an officer of Shadwell Police-office. Upon a pre-
concerted signal being given, he went to the defen.
datit's house, and found that Leadbeater, a City Mar-
shal, who accompanied Caul and Nash, had the de-
fendant in custody. Leadbeater produced 50 gui-
' neas, which he said he took from the person of Caul.
The witness asked Nash who Caul had received them
from ? he ans4red, from the defendant, and that
' Caul had paid him £56. ss. for them in Notes, and a
Bank Dollar. He asked the defendant if it was true?
He said-it was; but added, that the difference be-
tween A'k). 10s. and £56.-ss. was given him by Caul,
as a present for the exchange ; that he had not charg-
ed more than Rl. Is. for each guinea. Leadbeater
then produced a parcel of Bank of England Notes,
which, he said, he took from a drawer in a bureau,
in the room. They were the notes the witness had
given to Nash ; there were three short. He asked
the prisoner if he had any sliver ? He put his hand
iu is pocket, and brought it out full of dollars and

other silver. The witness took from amongst them
'the dollar he had Marked. He asked the defendant
if he had much more gold ? He shewed-him a bag
containing 90 guineas ; a second, containing a great
quantity of half-guineas ; and a third with seven-
shillings pieces. There were several empty money-
bags in the room.' The three other Bank of Eng.
land Notes were produced by Leadbeater ; he took
them from Caul, with the other Bank dollar.
J. Caul fully corroborated the evidence of the last
witness, as to his and Nash's instructions. When
they went first to the house of the defendant, they
saw his wife, Nash said the witness was an acquaint-
ance of his, just come from Holland. She inquired
from the witness what he wanted ? he replied, in
Dutch, a little gold; she asked who recommended
him, in the same language ; he answered Captain
Kaysoll, who was gone to Gottenburgh ; she sheaved
them into the parlour, and sent a boy for the defen-
dant, who shortly made his appearance, and asked
nearly the same questions his wife had done. He
said, he knew Captain Kaysrll. The witness told him
he hoped he would let him have the gold on the same
terms as Captain Kaysoll. The defendant answered,
he could not : he let him have 900 guineas, at an ad-
vance of Is. 3d. ; but the price had rose, and he
could not take less than Is. 6d. advance. The wit-
ness told him he museeven agree to that ; firm paper
would be of no use to him in Holland ; and he only
wanted 50 guineas. The defendant gave him the
guineas, and he paid him R. 56 in notes, and ss. by a
Bank dollar. The defendant told him he must take
care how he took them out of the country, for by the
law of the land he was not entitled to take more than
five. He told him he need not be afraid, for he would
wind them round his waist. Leash said he knew a better
way than that, for he could sew them in a garter and
fasten his stockings with them. The defendant's wife
said she knew a better way than either, and asked the
witness it he did not wear a cushion in his neck-hand-
kerchief ?he answered in the affirmative. She brought
a piece of flannel, and rolled some shillings in it, and
said, " Thus you may put your guineas, and when
folded in your handkerchief, it will be beyond suspi-
cion." The witness proposed they should have some-
thing to drink, which was sent for. They took a
glass of rum a-piece. The defendant requested that
the witness would recommend some o( his country-
men to him, and, by mentioning his name, it would
be a passport. Nash and the witness were going out
of the street door, attended by the defendant and his
wife, when they were all shoved back by Leadbeater
and Browne: the defendant seemed much frightened,
and whispered the witness in Dutch to say, that he
did not give more than RI. Is. for each guinea. On
his cross-examination, he said he gave bank-notes for
guineas, and not coin for coin.
Leadbeater and Nash corroborated the evidence of
the other two witnesses.

Mr. MARRYATT said, the exchange was admitted ;
but he had humbly to submit to his Lordship, that
the indictment could not be maintained. It was
founded on an Act of Parliament which was nearly
obsolete : the Act stated that it was unlawful to ex-
change gold coin for silver, or silver coin for gold,
for profit ; but not a word was mentioned of bank-
notes ; they could not be contemplated, for they were
unknown for many years after ; and by the statute,
the penalty was as great on the purchasee as on the
purchaser.

Lord ELLENBORAVGII-.••48 If you wish, Mr. Mar.
ryatt, you can save this point ; not that I hold a doubt
of its invalidity, but because we have a vast deal to
do, and there will be more time to argue it in terms ;
I have not a doubt but the statute was intended for
the exchange of the truck of the then present day ;
but I think it wide enough to admit Bank-notes, or
even gross goods, if it is agreed to take a certain
value over the standard currency."
Mr. MARRYATT-46 The only reason, my Lord,
that I should wish to argue the question now is, that
the defendant is liable to a specific punishment, if
found guilty, and the Crown may arrest him."
Mr. ATTORNEY-GENERAL--I will, my Lord, do
away with Mr. Marryatt's uneasiness, for I will give
my promise the defendant shall not be disturbed, un-
til after his Counsel has an opportunity of moving for
a new trial. He is already under bail.
Lord ELLENBOROUGII.—GentIemen of the Jury, I
am of opinion that the defendant did receive more
than he was allowed by the proclamation ; and I
would recommend that you should find your verdict
as such ; at the same time I will wave the point for
the defendant; but don't let it be understood that I
am of opinion that it is not a breach of the statute. I
would not wish it to go abroad that there was any
doubt upon the subject, for it is a most injunious
traffic. The Jury returned a verdict of—Guilty.

CARRICK V. DYER AND OTHERS.

Mr. Gmutow stated that the plaintiff in this action,
and the defendants also, were Blackwell-hall mer-
chants, and the action was brought to recover .€920,
for a breach of contract for 50(X) fleeces of wool that
had been bought of the defendants by the plaintiff-
It was with great regret that he said any thing that
could call in question the good faith of an English
merchant, but he was sorry to say, that on this oc-
casion his instructions compelled him to accuse Mr.
Swaine, one of the defendants, with wilful breach
of contract. Mr. Carrick had, with an eminent bro
ker, looked at some fleeces at the defendant's ware-
house, and Mr. C. remarked that there were many
coarse ones among them, when Mr. Swaine said that
he would himself see the coarse separated from the
others, and that they should be prime picked, soft-
handled fleeces. On this warranty they were bought
and paid for ; but on opening them, a considerable
time afterwards, each package, at top, was found to
contain good wool, but at bottom they were filled
with coarse wool and flocks. The broker sent his
clerk to see the fleeces sorted, and Mr. Swaine him.
self separated them, but in a very dark Fart of the
warehouse, so that it was impossible the young man
could see what was doing.
The plaintiff's broker proved that Mr. Swaine
promised to Mr. Carrick that they should all be prime-
picked, soft-handled fleeces. He also proved the
contract, which originally had stood Norfolk fleeces ;
but the defendants not being able to warrant them to
be the produce of that county, he had altered the
word " Norfolk" to " prime picked," &c.
Lord ELLENBOROUGII.••••MeTC both parties con•
suited in this alteration ?

Witness.—No, my Lord, only the defendants.
Lord Ezzar4BOßGoliGliew•HOW could you do so,

Sir ? You stood beteteen the parting to s etla';or of
high responsibility, and you h:tve pot the pl is!. if is
a most perilous situation by your roo.l.ter.
ATTORNEY GENERAL.—My Lot d. n tit"; hlta'llin.z
what has been thrown out ag the ch Tut., cif
one of my clients, I do tt,q conceivo it honourable t
lay hold of this as an objection ag:tinst the valittty
the contract.

Lord ELLIENIMROMTI.-•-lit is very honourable r f
your clients, Mr. Attorney General ; and, Sir, n-v-r
while you live. and :►re a broker, make :►n tlr--lti. h
in a contract without the cnncunence of both the
ties. We have too many instances of this n►Tligence
in brokers ; they cannot be ton secureiti the;r contrac's.
Arromtv GIM.:RAL.— My Lord, I can nnw with
safety to the character of my clients, propose that tl,e
matter be kit to arbitr.►th,n of one of the Gentlemen
of the Jury, who will he able to see the pl:►ce in which
the fleeces were sorted : to this proposal Mr. Garrows
on the part of the pl.►inti:l's, acced!d.

glass, at one side of the door, 1
as to afford witness an opport
braced, of looking into the path
served. When she looked into
• .