Star.
London, England, 1817-07-18 00:00:00

. . .
to the shy wren sl a had seen Mrs. Halion! sitting'
upon the c'..efendant's knee.
Ir was read in the following terms:
" Mae Mits. Rraw.ta...,—.l:ee lialfords have ail beet;
makiag a ttt.,y of some weeks here, hut they are now about les
depot, &c. Without apt rf,ct explanation yin! and I may no;
uuderstatid each other, and fur tha, reason I write, prititub.„:7y
as I find you are staying so long away from IV m.lellon. P.a you
know we arc frequently of dill'rert (minium, it is better;
perhaps, that it should he .;o. I tor now belting um kw a cook
and housekeeper, and I hoiie to find cue to answer my fur.
po.e: therefore when you return to Wilde-Lim it w:11 be as a
visitor. This arrangement you Will not el:like, especially as
you have but Hale ktrneletige ur for the
• The witness added. that the object of the defen-
dant by this letter, was; as mochas possible to an-
noy her; and to dita‘w from her, it pot:Able, a refu-
sal to continue longer in his house at Dandelion.
To qiiestions from Lord ELLErtaostotxm, the saii,
that the plaintiff usually lett Dandelion twice a wet k
from April to June, 1816; and during that period
the criminal intercourse had undoubtedly continued.
Her brother was so h.:sty and violent that she did
not think pf speaking to hint herself upon the sub!
ject :.she had not withdrawn from a house where she
had witnessed this criminal conduct so frequently,
because she wag of particular service to her brother,
in keeping his books, Ste. 'She was in hopes it would
he found out in same other way. Mr. Cramp and
Mary Rolfe, were to have made a comertinicatif.ri
during the witness', stay with her daughter. She
was airaid even of dropping a hint about it to her
brother.

Mr. John Cramp lives very near Dindelion, and ;1
acquainted with the family of the defendant. Early
in the month of May, Mrs. Stewart made a commit-.
nication to him respecting her brother's conduct : he
advised her not to disclose it to ;toy one but to her
brother. lie saw the m tid Servant also upon the
subj,ct ; he declined cornmiiiikating the matter to
any body but Sir T. Stain. s. Mrs. Stewart said that
she was Afraid, from the violeiice of her brother's
temper, fiat he would knock the witness down. Mary
kolte is still in the service ut the defendant. The
defendant has but one arm.

Mary Rolfe, the servant, corroborated every part
of Mrs. Stew irt's testimony, so far as related to their
meeting at night, watching the different parts of the
house, and listening to what passed in Mts. HAlford'a
bed-room. She said site had heard a person getting
into the bed of fifl!s. ; that she heard some
whispering, bilt.coutd not know whose whisper it wait,
or whether one to two persons whispered. When stie
made the bed in the morning, she thought at one time
that more than tine person had slept in it ; but after-
wArtieliad some doubt auout it.

This was the substance of the case on the part of
the plaintiff.
Mr. S:tijeant BitsT, for the defendant, addressed
the Jury in an able and ingenious speech, in which
he endeavoured to prove that no adulterous inter-
course whatever had taken place. The circumstance
on which he chiefly dwelt was that of the witness,
Mrs. Stewart, never having made the affair public
until her !mother had discarded lie: from his house;
when in a fit of anger and malice that wicked wont in
trumped the story wl ich she related that day in
Court ; and laid it alter a lapse of nine months, for
the purpose of ruining her btother and an innocent
woman, whose honour and sitar toter she had deter.
mined to ruin. Here the Learned Seejeant CMPTIC3.
fed oil all the parts of Mts. Stew art's eviderce, ;e ere
der to shew that it WAS defective, as Well as
tent ; and he covresttled. that from the manner in
which she had conducted herself—tram her firstkeep-
ing the business react, end afterwards disclosing •
only in a lit c,f malice, she was unworthy of ctesiiia
I ler very concealment was alone sudicient to shake
her resumialy ; and it statements thus treasured op,
and only sent forth when a particular purpose was to
be answered, should be believed by e Jury, nn man
could be sate against the machinations of wicked err.
sons. The evidence of Mary Rolle di not in the sligh-
test degree go to prove any act of :adultery ; and
therefore must rest tin the statement of one who had
acted more like a fiend than a human bring. A per.
son had been heard getting into Mr. Haltord's bed ;
that ;mull might be Mrs. Raiford hersel!. Wins.
;wring had been 10.3td; but there was no evidence as
to who the prawn was that whispered—whether one
person or two persons whispered. It was unneces-
sary to remind the Jury, that certain offices were per.
formed in the dead hour of the slight, during Which
ej;.calatiuns were uttered in W:itspers. On such at
UCca+io.,, it was not unreasonable to suppose that a
cheste and virtu-ins woman might be settling her ac-
e unt with her CREATOIS. He wished the Jury also
LO attend to the evidence of th.• servant, where she
stated that she did nut think the bed had the appear.
ance of two persons having slept in it. There were
CAWS in which much stronger evidence to prove the
aVultery had been adduced than on the present cc.
casion—cas s in which the parties had been seen in a
bed-room t igether—and yet no verdict was given toil,'
any of the plaintiffs. But this wicked woman, on
whose testimony the whole ct this case rested, went
no further than mere tuvicion. It was incumbent
on the plaintiff to bring the guilt home to a moral
certainty : all that could be proved, however, was,
that the defendant had been out of his room, and
who could tell whether there were not occasions very
different from any guilty Motive which made it ne.
cessary for him to leave his room for a very short
time ? Not a single tact had been stated in evidence
which was not perfectly reconcileabk with the inno-
cence of the parties. The circumstance of the lady
being found sitting on the defeniliiiit's knee, even if
true, could not be • matter of surprise to any one
Who considered the intimacy that It id subsisted be-
tween all the parties. Beside, it Sir Thos. Staines
had been coi.szious of guilt, must he not have known
that his fate was in the hands Of this woman ? and
was it to be supposed that he would have dismissed
her from his house ?-1:1 justice and charity, the Jury
could n•-t, on both veide..ce as had been adduced,
find a verdict against the defendant. a was cot.
vie.ced they would not on this occasion allow a pi.
Lint and deservingoftcer to fall a sacrifice to the
malice of an artful and designing woman; but that
the laws would this day, through them,
give protect.
tion to an individual who had fought and shed hit
blood in defence if those laws. With reread to ti,e
pr.iperty of the deli:nal:art, lie had nor been pro
possess any ; in fact Or was at present ai halt pay
Captain, eejeyine id addition a pen,ion for the loss
of his arm, amounting to about halt a guinea a day
and should tie Jury fake a different view of
to What he had door, he trusted they would

-
the .4; :.•ge
I bail out