Star.
London, England, 1818-05-11 00:00:00

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

LIABILITY OP A HUSBAND TO SUPPORT HIS WIFE.
LADY PERROT V. FARNWORTH.

This was an action which, from the nature of the
defence set up by the defendant, excited a consider-
able degree of interest, and occupied the attention of
a very crowded Court for nearly five hours.
It was an action of assumpsit, brought by Lady
Margaret Jemima Perrot against the defendant, for
the support and maintenance of his wife.
Mr. CLARKE addressed the Jury, and stated the cir-
cumstances under which the action was brought.—
The plaintiff, Lady Perrott, he said, was the widow
of a Baronet of a very small fortune, and was under
the necessity, from her own distressed situation, to
bring this action against the husband of one of her
daughters, for expenses to which she had been put
'for the maintenance and lodging of that daughter.
When the defendant married his wife, which was
some time back, he was a general merchant, anis%
in repute, and supporting a respectable establishment;
he has since become a bankrupt. Subsequent to this
misfortune, he had again got into business, and was
now carrying on the trade of a wine merchant in El-
bow-lane, in the city of London. For reasons which
it was impossiblesatisfactorily to explain, he had re-
fused to maintain his wife, who was, in consequence,
obliged to resort to her mother for a living; and for
expenses incurred in this way the mother now sought,
as she was entitled to do, compensation from the
hands of the Jury.
Mr. Baron RtotAnns—ls it necessary that the
Court should be occupied in this discussion?
Mr. DAuNcee—ln justice to my client and to my-
self, I should state, that, as far as this particular cause
is concerned, there would be no objection to refer it.
But as the fate of other actions, depending upon the
same defence which is to be made to this, would not
be affected by this reference, I do not see what ad-
vantage would be obtained.
Sir E. P. Perrot, Bart, deposed, that he was the
son of Lady Perrot. Mrs. Farnworth was his sister;
he was present at her marriage with Mr. Farnworth,
about twelve years ago. At that time Mr. Farn-
worth was living in Tavistock-place, and was a gene-
ral merchant. Witness immediately after this went
down to his regiment,*and was,stbsent for two or
three years. Witness was present at Lady Perrot's
lodgings in August, 1816, at an interview which took
place between the defendant and his wife and Lady
Perrot. Witness had learned, that for some time
previously Mrs. Farnworth had been living with her
mother; he also understood that some application
had been made to the defendant for some mainte-
nance for his wife. A question was put to the de-
fendant in witness's presence, whether he intended to
maintain his wife? He answered, that it was then
impossible—it was out of his power; but he shortly
expected to be in some sort of business, and was look-
ing after a house in the City, of which as soon as he
obtained possession he would acquaint Lady Perrot
and her daughter. He added, that then his wife
should have one half of whatever he got. The con-
versation ended by his saying that he was determined
never to live with his wife any more. It was impos-
sible to live with her; but he would share with her
what he received. Witness then went away, and was
absent from town some time. He left his sister liv-
ing with his mother. He had not spoken to the de-
fendant since, but discovered that he was living in
Elbow-lane. He went to ascertain the fact, and saw
the house in which he resided: it was a respectable
private house. _ _

_
Cross-examined by Mr. DA UNCEY.
-You are not now in the army, are you?—l am not.
When did you cease to be in the army ?—I cannot
charge my memory.
Ducharge, I apprehend, is more in the military line
of expression ?—I was not discharged.
I did not say you were ; but do you not know when
you quitted the army ?—I do not remember ; but I
think it was in 1809.

Was your sister supported by Mr. Farnworth in
that year P—l can't tell.
Not tell, Sir! Do you know whether they lived

tbgether?—lt is impossible for me to say, for 1 was
Very little in town: I only know from report.
Do you not know that the separation took place
betWeeit ilumh so far back as 1809?-.Nti: 1 was slot
in London when the separation took place. It is
very probable it was so far back. I am a married man,.
and have lived with my mother's family very little.
How many children has Lady Perrot?—Dive.
Are they all married?—All except two, a son and
a daughter.
A pretty large exception out of five.. What is the
name of your single sister ?—Augusta Matilda Perrot.
She goes by another name, I believe ?—She has
reasons for doing so.
No deubt, Sir. Miss Fitzhenry is her other name,
I believe ?—lt is. lam ready to explain herreasons
for assuming that name, if it should be necessary, as
I should be sorry any improper impression should
arise from the absence of such explanation.
No, Sir, yuu need not be at that trouble. Her real
name is Augusta Matilda. She is the same lady, L
presume, Whom we have seen announced as an ac-
tress?—She is, Sir; and it is on that account she has
assumed a fictitious name.

Lady Pet rot too, I believe, occasionally acts ?—I
believe so.

Where does your mother live?—ln Cleveland-street.
Are you in the habit of visiting her? Very seldom.
Who hies with her? Her youngest son and my sister.
Do you know what allowance the defendant made
to his wife when he first parted with her ?_4 only
-know from iiparsay, that it son SOU a year. ,•
What Mrs. Farnworth's means of living were since
that allowance was stopped, you do slot know ?—No,
1 have no means of information.

Ann Winter deposed for the defendant, that she
was engaged as wet nurse to Mrs. Farnworth's child,
some time in 1806. She continued in that situation
eleven months. Mrs. Farnworth at that time lived
in Tavistock-place.
Mr. CLARKE.—This was so far back as 180 G?
Mr. DAUNCEY.—The time makes no difference.

Mr. CLARKE submitted, that the husband having
separated from his wife, without making any charge
of the sort alluded to by Mr. Dauncey, could not now
bring such a charge in bar of this action.
Mr. Baron RICHARDS said, he should like to know
upon what authority Mr. Clarke's argument was
founded!

Mr. CLAnce said he did not recollect any imme-
diate authority being upon the case.
Mr. DAUNCEY cited two cases from the 6th Term
Reports, in which Judge Buller had distinctly laid it
down, that adultery in the wife, at any time, and
under any circumstances, relieved the husband from
all responsibility for her support.
Mr. Baron RICHARDS decided that the evidence
was admissible.

The witness then tent on with her testimony. She
recollected an Officer in the army used to visit her
mistress very frequently ; this was about six months
before she left. She saw them once in a very parti-
cular situation—she was a married woman herself.
and had no doubt of what occurred. The Gentle-
man used to come as a sweetheart to Miss Farnworth,
the defendant's sister.• She took letters after this,
and previous to the separation-of Mrs. Farnworth
from her husband, from Mrs—F. to othei Gentlemen.
Mr. Farnworth usually went out in the morning at
eleven, and returned at five to dinner. He some-
tittles went out afterwards to spend the afterneos.—
During his absence several Gentlemen used to Call.
She recollected one evening going to Mrs. Fain-
worth's bed-room, and finding it locked. She had
previously been waiting at supper, and took in some
ducks. She had seen Mrs. Farnworth a short time
before in the parlour with a Gentleman. The Gen-
tleman followed Mrs. Farnworth when she left the
room. Witness afterwards went into the bed-room,
and found the bed tumbled. At this time Lady Per-
rot was in the parlour. Recollected Mrs. Farnworth
taking her to a Mrs. Simmons's, in Marchmont-street.
Witness waited in the front palour with the infant.
while her mistress went into a back parlour to speak
.to a Gentleman there. It was the same Gentleman
who had supped off the ducks. Witness was after-
wards desired to carry the child into the back par-
lour, and saw a bed there much tumbled. She could
not say whether it had been previously made or not.
Cross-examined.--She said she met Mr. Farnworth,
and that he asked her if she could tell him any thing
respecting the conduct of his wife? and that she then
told him all she knew. She lastly said, that before
she told him she went home and asked her husband,
and that she sent for Mr. Farnworth to her house, and
then told him. She considered Mrs. Farnworth, as
common as dirt in the streets.
Frances Merret deposed, that she lived with Mrs.
Farnworth in 1808 and 1809, and frequently saw
Gentlemen take improper liberties with her. The
Gentlemen came after her master went out in the
morning. When any Gentleman was there, her mis-
tress always desired she might be denied to any per-
son who might call. It was a Mr. Spurren whom
she saw with her mistress.

T. Thompson, a footman, who lived with Mr.
Farnworth in November, 1808, saw Mr. Spurren, as
he was in the garden, sitting by his mistress on the
sofa in an improper attitude. In cross-examination,
he said he told his master what he had seen.
Mrs. Sarah Cre se deposed, that Mrs. Farnworth
came to live at her house after her separation from
her husband, in June, 1812. During the time she
was with her she was visited by several Gentlemen.
Mrs. Farnworth had but one bed in her apartments.
A Gentleman slept in her apartments for several
nights ; she could not tell in which room.
Miss Augusta Matilda Perrot was called-to contra-
dict the testimony of Mrs. Cheese. She deposed that
she almost invariably slept with her sister; and that
the gentleman who had been described as having
slept in their apartments, was a cousin, a son of
Colonel Montague : he slept on a sofa, which had
frequently been used for her brother and mother.
Miss Crerse was called for the defendant, and said
that Miss Perrot seldom or ever slept at her mother's
house, but generally went away about ten at night.
Mr. Baron RICHARDS recapitulated the evidence,
leaving it to the Jury to say which set of witnesses
they believed. It was a serious question, involving
consequences of great importance to the parties.
The Jury after a short consideration found a ver-
dict for the plaintiff, of two guineas per week for 52
weeks, or 1091. 4s.—Costs 40s.
Both husband and wife were in Court during most
lof the proceedings; the latter is a pretty petite figure.

•••••••,Y.,

4

OLD 13.411,E

Saturday, William William Claxton
for stealing. a mare, the properf,
prosecutor is an umbrella-maker
The prisoner called on him,
recommended to him by the
Mr. Rowbintom, to purchase a
prosecutor turd him his mare wa
but he would send for her. The
he would save him the trouble -
ing her up, as he would go
soon after called on him, said
mare to town, and asked if he
his trying her in his cart? The
had none; and expre;sed a wish
was in the cart. 'll.e prisoner
never saw his snare or the prisoner
after, when he found she had be
horse-dealer, in 'Ray-street, Clerkenwell,
The prisoner called two witnesses '
the time he had the mare from •
a condition to have paid for her.
said he had bargained with Mr.
the mare for 181. if she pleased
found him Not Guilty ; and •
theatrical air, and pointing the
his right hand towards his heart,
of the Jury, I most sincerely thank
dict, and be assured it has made
proudest of my life."
George Tarsier was indicted
session three forged Bank of .
consequence of some information,
Officer went to Pump-court, Fetter-lane,
house ; they had been there about half s,
the prisoner came in. They searched I
in one breeches-pocket two good
guinea ; in the other a little bag,
forged notes. These were put i
soner overturned the table on w;
with a view to regain possession
disappointed. On the cross-exam
that the prisoner's mother had,
pleaded guilty to the offence of
in her possession. The prisoner'
he received the notes, not knowing
been forged, from his mother, dai
with her dinner to Hor--

During the trial of three men
Baron GAaaow, in begging the:
their consideration the capital part
observed, that he could not help
the Middlesex side, persons were
capital offences, when there was
sitions or informations to warrant
It could only be for the purpose
not that that was a matter
Judges, but it often made it a most
ous duty to the Jury. The guilt
three prisoners alluded to, as far
rested principally upon the evidence
who, it may be recollected, was
for the devastation and pillage
time of the memorable Spa.fields
not giving credence to his statement,
slightest hesitation, pronounced
Guilty.
Lord PALMERSTON was so
the unfortunate young man, Da,
tried on Friday, for shooting at
furnished the means for his defence,
assistance of those professional
pealed in his behalf.

The following is the Report
the Calico Printers' Petiti m
have examined evidence in support
the Petitioners for a Repeal of -
hinted Cottons, and they are
duty ie partial and oppres.ive, and
desira."

Some hoaxers attacked Sir Jf
day. A circular letter was sent ,
persons, in the name of Sir JOll
to attend on Saturday at the T(
rough, between eleven and one,
particular nature. The Office -
public business considerably interrupted
sons who had received the letters.

Mr. BLAXit's horse Lidator
Newmarket July Meeting, against
Merlin (Bst. 51b. each), A. F. for '
Lord G. H. CAvesnisu gal
guineas for Fanny, the favourii
posed to be the fleetest 3-year-old
Between Sunday se'nnight
the houses, with the exception of
the farm of Tayburn, in the pari.
Glasgow, possessed by a family
say, were consumed by
difficulty escaped. An old woman
out. by any other way than a window,
of the cattle awakened the people.
and a number of calves and a bull
as the fire began in the cow.hr
treated to the farthest cud of the
there the flames soon followed ....
buildings contained was consumed.
CORN-EXCHANGE, MARK-I
Our market continuing to be
with Foreign Wheat, and the demand
very inadequate, has caused a 1.
prices of from '2s. to 4s. per
samples of our own growth are
duction. The niidliag qualities
Ss. to 4s. per quarter cheaper,
great importations from abroad,
and 2s:per.quarter. lower, and
decline of Is. per quat ter.—Cui
ximuse. Sinai
Wheat, Kent and Tick
Essex 7ss 885 Oats,
Suffolk 7ss 843 s
Norfolk • 70s 80s
Rye...... .. ASs Flour, pi.
Barley . 34s 34s Rapeseed,
Malt
White Peas 400 4fla Wheat,
Katie Re
Grey Peas ......
SbrinroV.LD MARKET
To sulk the 'offal—per stone
Beef ........4s ski to 3s 0.1 I
Veil*.
Mutton .. ..51 Od to tis Oct Pork
Lamb - 7s. Od.
Beasts 2130—Calves 220—Sheep and ,
HAY AND STRAW P'
Hay •Xsto6 es I Straw..
C3ailetr • to 7 76 Itowen

.-..IPY BY

. .
. .
I i
• I
•
•
SESSIONS
- ---..• "-- ~.--=l=L-7.z.: . .
• LI
n was capitally 'indicted , -
;51,
erty of H. Crewe. The •
.
ker, in Aldersgate-street. # 4
i ".,
, and said he had been _
e pmsecator's friend, a ~
,
a mare from him. The il
: I was at Waltham Cross,
• r
The prisoner told him
e and expense of bang-
for her. The prisoner , , 'lt 4' f
11
d he had brought the
he had any objection to . •
'he prosecutor said he
•
ish to we her when she
:r went away ; and he . .
•
prisoner till some days
A
I been sold to Parish, a •.
lerkenwell, for 81. Is.— ...,
aesses to prove that at
la Mr. Crewe he was in
ter. In his defence, he . ..
Ifr. Crewe to purchase • •• i"
. •
eased him. The Jury -
-.
1 the prisoner, with a ,
he tips of the fingers of I t,
art, said—" Gentlemen
hank you for your ver- •
. -
made this moment the
I for having in hs pos- .
#f England Notes. In
14' 4
tion, Foy and ; nor \
Fetter-lane, to sc arc i a i I ! •-•
1 c
'out half an hon.' w :en I, # 1
arched him, an tfound
oud notes and ha f-a- : ,
bag,. containing three
t in a hat, and the pri- 11
which they wer : pla-el
on of them, but he was i t' I
, . ,
amination, it i.ppe red : # . A
tad, a short time ago, ,
of having forged notes
1111.
Ler's defence was, that 1
t . .
nowing them to have
one day when he went I 1
per-lane jail.—Guilty.
ien for burglary, Mr. " i 'i
.'
leJury to dismiss from 1,
al part of the offence,
i
help thinking that, en , , I
were often indicted for 1 '
as nothing in the depo-
Tant such indictments. . • I .1: 1
else of giving trouble, i / '
of complaint by the • 1 .
most painful and anxi-
lilt or innocence of the 1, •
'ar as the larceny went,
;deuce of Wm.Gunnell, i •
as tried with Cashman, I'; • "
age committed at the
:Ids riot ; and the Jury
tatement, without the
i
d all the prisoners Not l ,
,' ,
anxious for the fate of • - .
)avid Davis, who was i i ,
it his Lordship; that he ,
. . \
fence, and supplied the
II Gentlemen who ap- :1
•t of the Committee on
:-" Y. u Committe.s # •
. upport of the case of :
of 1 the Excise Duty on ;: I
of opinion, that the 1 0 i
lad consider the repeal
1
roHN EASIER on Sawn.
t to between 2 and 3(0 I.
0/IE4 requesting them
•I
11
Town Hall, in the ilo-
se,
upon business of a • 1 ..,
!was crowded, and the li
.
nterrupted by the per-
sli
:ers.
/ ,• is matched at the nest 1
linst Mr. WoLLasrou's 4 :
Or 300 guineas.
rave Mr. JONES 1,000
I ,
:rite for the Oaks, sups,
>ld filly in the kingdom.
and Monday morning,.
of a small building, on
parish of Fenwick, near
.y of the name of Lind-
ale inmates with much
Oman could not be got I
vindow. The bellriwing
' illi
1
eople. Thirteen cows
a bull were destroyed, ji,
souse. The latter re- -
he dwelling house ; hut •ii,
him. Every thing the .. a •
med.
,;. .'
:K-LANE, MAY il.
le .oundantly supplied i 11,
en:and for which being ..
1101 ,
c further decline in our . ' quarter, the ordinary I
Ili . 1 e unsaleable at that re-
ties of Barley are also
! i t
in consequence.of the s , , 1 .
,d. Beans are dull sale,
,4 I Oats sold slowly, at a , I,
. ; n-rent prices as under :
ill Beans SO, 546
k ditto ... ......... 46s 54v
s, Potatoe . yes 54, 1 • f,
I „,
- Poland ... 244 301 if t '
i
- Feed • leo tee .
ar, per Mack..
*wed, per Last £5O 14a i
froossott. I,!'
eat, Dentate ..... B4s sea
is Red, Hassbro' or
ninen,Drabent red 74s 84$
:ET, MAY it. , 1
•
'to& of albs.
Ihr ss ed to As 6d , i -, ' t
it ..... 5s 4d to 6s 6d : .„1 •
. to Es. Ca.
II Lambs 11,510—Pigs :2' CO
1 I
PUg LOAD.
-. if , •
SO 1.2 s to .f. 5 ns
n ... •of •001 to t's 1 0
•
.q
. .
i
i: a*
~. _.