The Statesman.
London, England, 1822-12-06 00:00:00

T STAWSIif AN

Lear Mar leafed of Ito
wet eoesider In the per.
Should litre twee juatillea
td 'not the tideway of'
Molleitor•©eeeral °peek
!arguments of the Gentle•'
read not only thEerideaee
.nell. hut he had looked over
•virtenee, and he humbly sub-
t presented to the Jnry with
the prodnetion of some of
withheld would have pre.
the refusal to predate the
alone hare bees fatal to
•man went on to argue
if the Court

The Soucy/vs

JENCU, Dec. I.
EDUt N.
LUGO ITT.
compensation in damages
's niece by the defendant,

concerned by Mr. Gooney sad
by Mr. ISCARLCIR.
to the Jury. ife said the
the ratan* of the Duke of
on the busioess of a straw
Audley-street. Ills nisei
lees of charity. had her-
. oecarlonstiy assisted WOO
rented apartments of her. The
eoasiderabie property, occ=z
t, sad by that means had
inofseements he might think. pro-
anfortunate girl. The platy
slightest suspicion that any
bettrien the defendant and
)n the latter had gives her •
yeti from one of his friends.
In • situation so he above
An explanation ensued.
the whole of the fatal troth ;
'doomed in pregemney by the de-
to perform her esoal work
Mr. Palmer had been At
obtaining medical assistance foe
coder the necessity of employ.
ter situation. It was for these
a brawl* as well as for the la-
id la the oseeetioe of his niece.
therefore, hoped that when the Jary
eleenatstasees of the ease, they
to give damages whirs

plaiatif. proved the criminal
and the defendant.
evidence were tee indelicate for
weer tbit the defendant had remitted
'absolute..
Midwife-ado Itaddlleinind bar at
• celled. teeploseei
*weed phi" lie

ealiNsM preorest list bnIMPAIIn
41ted always been sednitAnd

diellindmet. geld, that is a mini Of
seder pallier Mittel-
medial of eeelle lay the scow in
Pl-6vcrit:ll2-I'llse passion totild'he called id cow:.
sells* was riot brought by the
ewowesedyff **bad theist*
'•Withe pimiento's her tioele,'
et a servant ; Vile tees of
me snore to Me Mae if taw
.osab' imie• or any other female ter--
`• what *as the sun the plalodf
etnployed la hie nieee's
that ,the made or the east
say improper latereourse
niece. He therefore hoped
Awl ail }ha clenuestances of
to.tid giro the plaintiff Utile
• seamed up the evideees, oh-
'ph the ea. *blab bed heel
.. blithe place of the pialatlre
it was steer that seas per.
Mikpsrpse. The weft sad
disk respective distends • their
idiot *of the design; they 'shoal/
;testi* however, vioahl veinal*.
-tio*Athe eatidodi
sustained.
&bolt half hoer, Fatalist'
•Dataaget W. ends (Orly alifilitei
rOVII aricuaLool. .
raoturcurion or Laval, it

against Mr. Frary, a, gentle.
cesebrnan, named Koper, for a
.d from the evidence on be.
Fairy took a stable and
Mr. Hayward, at Cado.
were separated only tenni
le-lay a yaed. The premises
and he consequently rev
them off his bands, which
Feary then, threatened to
to premises ; and bronght
anted ont the entrance, and
er ; but neither look posses:
last, • number of Irish hex.
ll:each-house, and gathered
,cing, and making various
uproar until ten at night,
Jew to retire, and they Went
ippaar that ea this evening Mr.
upon the premises.
mseeutor was closed, the Cox-
'ed for the defendant, coo-
the LORD 01111 F Jusitce,
oto a rule of Coact not to
mold submit to a refetence
to the terms op which the
co Mr. Hayward. ,
lei:mentor, acquiesced in the
sys expressed his willingness
ere discharged from giving
I Court.
DRIVING.
V. RAM

• -

$

proprietors of the Block.
for the ,datosicr which be
millet of the defehdast's

action was brought, took
in Parlistnent.street, West.
dricieg up to Charing.
ted by his nephew, and pass.
.1-waggon' when the coach of
reeds the bridge, was driven
ed it to be overturned, and Ile
Meet. The nephew r.f Ihr
Ibe were walking along the
n as occasioned entirely by
'a coachman, who was dri v-
not deviate in the least from
On an application Wag
defendant, he ',ad that tile
cost fifteen guineas, anti
ton tba'n..psy such •
I.; hut 71. 7.. et thii was*
broken were old.
Lachman, a helper front the.
fey, soil the foreinan'of
WWI Was rifling on the boa..
set down tbepassongers, sink
at a patois( eitn.assra than
Jaoti th?irship, but the

, 7

irld had the whip, which tit* driver said he
Id net wait, These witoesses declared that ttit
Ent -rosy solely from the imprudence-et Mr. Imem
to attempting to pass between two Ilea', ire-,
beginning to reply is'

behallof the plaintiff, when
The Jury intimated that they would not troaltle him,
and found a verdict for the plaintiff—la-maps IW. i
_.......
COURT OF COMMON FLEAS. Tnuasear, Nov. 5.
tinCIAL JURT.—Before Mr. Justice Ouneouou.
' QUESTION OF UROITSMACT.—comoss out.
JAMF.E IIEAD V. MART MEAD.
Mr. 'AmtARAMS opened the pleadings in this ease, and
Mr. Sergeam (toccata followed oo the same side.'
The question tor the Jury fo decide was, whether the
plaintiff WA* the legitimate son of Mary Head, the d.-1
Pendant. The father and mother married in 1795.
William was a carpenter, and died at Lambeth Mardi.
It appeared that Win. Head was addicted to drinklig„
and his wife left herimshaad's boost, and went to reside
at Kent Fame. Beckenham; she bad a small annuity, in
her own right. This took place in 1795, and all chil-
dren born in wedlock are legitimate, unless it can be se-
tisfactotily proved to the contrary thin there was an
absence of intercourse between the husband end wife.
At one pwiml of the law of this country, ifs perms were
beyond the King's dominions, by that kw issue of the
wife was bastardised. The ancient live was, that it was
Impossible for a man to be the father of the cond. where
it could be shown that he had not been within the
King's dominions fur a long period of time, .bat Ye tWs
case it wculd be proved that tlisi husband had vislied
his wife, whose residues was sinly eight mileti,•iiiptait'
from that of her husband. , .5. .o.
Mr, Kicarby proffered the register of ilisardigs dee.
tweets Elisabeth Head and William Head. at Lambeth t.'
Joke Phillips —Knew Mr. aid Mrsitrad. whet IV"
lived'togetPr 1 it was Ili-vraes ago : hail known MM.
Head iirevions to his m opiate • he was a master cue
penter ind bender; had wen 'Miss Davis before her
marriage; visited them sfterwards : she was shout t
or 20 years orate ; can't say how Wag they lived sit
Lambeth ; 'recollects their separating, from the rPport•
of Mr. Head ; she removed to Kent House Farm; fleet
know what led to their separation ; went to his funeral;
be died i% Lambeth Marsh.
• Mts. Elisabeth Oreenberry exainieed, by &Weft
Hulloek.—Witness remembers living at Kent liamill
Farm. Wu the house keeper to Mr. Randall, and Is
his sister. Knew Mr. Head, the husband of Mrs Head
—hes seen him at Kent-horse farm—saw bian-severat
times, bat did not see him always—opened the door the
last time she saw bins. and let him in. It was the latter
end of July, or beginning of August—it wu in harvest
time. Mrs. !had was at home nub Mr. It , her brother,
who was laid up with the gout. lie allied for Mrs.
Head—he asked if Mrs. Head was at home,ond whites*
showed him into the kitchen, and said she would telt
Mrs. Head of his arrival. hich sbe-did. •It was 011%
Sunday—she went down to the kitchen to him. There
wawa* other pewees in the kitchen—this was the last
time willies:saw Mr. Head, it was about 10 or 1 1 o'cloelti
Witness left 1e*1798 —die has only bees there elate as
a visitor. Mrs. Head, from the observations slal Made
was in the family way When she left.
Mr. Sergeant Lens (with whom was Mr. Sergeant
VAEORAN) now addressed the Jury for the 'defendant,
and contended at *ode length that though t Dowstant
access by a husband to his wife would be a presuiptleto
proof that a child horn of his wife within e proper delft
was •his. yet it should be proved that the actese taut oft
kind affording robahle of that intercioutd from
which offspring eyelid a thee went %beatnik all
the lettuces le which web said to haw visited tie
i,
wife, and contended alt of (hem afforded sash
a piesaniption as that which the plaintiff's eildbed dad
endeavoured to establish. Ftom 'elitist Suer het beard
=implies west the other way ; list:theNtects
tufts atteallieg this erseWeh behAmeddloaserw.
lnd gibich wood put the question of illegith•sey has
youdisll doubt. He would rely, thee,—first, on tier west
of evidence of that access on-the part of the •ifeabsod
tom which en intercourse of a particular kind coetd lo
Inferred. He world rely upon the circumstance of Mrs.
Head's attachment fur young Randall—on the fact if het
having had, in •the year 190 f, one year after her hoe-
band's death, in illegitimaltiv child by this Randall—of
her having been married to him fire or six years after,
and oe the fart that the present plaintiff, from the time
of his childhood up to thieommencement of the pretest
action. had gone by the name of James Randall, sod net
James Head; and that Randall, the husband of Mrs.,
Head, paid for his education; and finally. that in the
last will of Wm. Head, made in August, 1800, just three
days before his death, lie bequeathed his estate sod affects
to his blether John and his sisters, to be divided share
and share alike.and appointed John sole executor.—Tho I
will also contained a bequest of 101. to his wife Elisabethl
if afire; but not a word was said is it of any child.;
though it must be evident if hie washed bad a ehild by I
him in 1799. he must Lave known something about it
before Mutest, IWO. These facts, when considered in
opposition to the slender evidence of access adduced by
the plaintiff, would, he bad no doubt, satisfy the twiods of
thealu ry. that he (the plaintiff) MIS not entitled to a
verdict at their hands.
Mrs. Southall.-1 am the sister of Mrs. Head. now
Mria Randall 1 remember her marriage with William
Heed. They did not agree well afterwards. There was
a mutual ditlike. He used to drink more than he ought,
bat there was nothing else bad in his conduct as I saw.
My sister left mi. in 1797. Not long after she went
to Kent farm-house, where Mr. Randall lived. She re-
mained till April, 1799, when she left, mad was delivered
of a son in the next month, at Chisellnirst. She had an
illegitimate child by young Medellin 1801. She coiled
it Randall. 141 not call on her after this. She was
wattled in 1806 or' Intl tolandall ; 1 'don't-kae*
which. I was not present.
Cross4tatuined.-1 did visit her ones after the hid,
the child at Chiselberst, but cat after the one in 1501.
The master to alum the plaintiff was first sent to
school proved, that be nas know by the name of James
Randall—That Mr. Randall (now married to plaintiff's
mother,) paid the expenses of his education. This was
after the marriage of Mrs. Held" and Randall. 1
thought the plaintiff bore a great t esembluce to Ran-
dall. Some other wit proved thit the plantiff
was generally known by the name of Randall. and not'.
Head.
Mr. Jemmett, the coroner fyr the county of Surrey, was
called to prove that at an, inquisition held by him os
the body of a man named Hickman (we think), a per-
son named J sines Randall was one of the jury, and
signed his name to the inquisition. Another of the
jurors on that occasion proved the, signature of Jewell
Rand .11, which a person acquainto with the plaintiff
was called tovoce was his writing.
_" .' .
The probate of the last will ayfitilliarn Head was
now put in. It was in effect what we bate before men-
tioned.
Sirs. Southall was again called to speak to the time
of her sister's marriage with Randall, hut she could not '
soy positively whe.hei it wee Ito 6 toe 1807.
air. Sergeant HtLLOCK again add d the jury in
reply to defendant's case' and again conteeded that is
law, if the jury believed that 'there was access by the'
'husband to the wife, they must find for the legitimacy'.
NO suspicions, however strong, would be sufficient to
itiabtert that principle. Even if the wife of a man were
to live In indisctiminste cosoimerce with four or live
other men, still if she was id a situatioa where- the bus-
band coa4l have access to 13..t1sit lox 'mold_ pm

_~..~