, 1865-01-11
CEExOUs DOMESTIC CASE.
Ptuuonk flcys lattons Of Fashionable
Life III Ou6ffn-Ltbe1 Suit Of un .At-
Iho<cas sralnst an 0cuItsI.


The Irish Court OF Common Pleas has been
occupied for whole week with . case which
est in Dublin, and to have been argncd with
singular yivacity and power by the advocates
engaged. 1t Tas an action Tor libel, brought
bv the daughter OF DR.. Traycrs against Lady
Wilde and her husband. Sir William Wilde.
Both the ladies concerned we're distinguished
for their literary attainments, and the posi-
tion of the parties IN The Irish capital natnral-
II added to the interest Of the cause. On the
9Th Of Muy, Lady Wilde addressed q note to
Dr.. TrartTs in which she prof:sscd to inform
him Of the &sdisrrputnble conduct" pursued
lbs af ta 5f III assTg 4Ss r. nat M1ss
rer boys in the place." and employed them
10 disseminate offensive p1acards, and
.'tracke in which she made it appear that she
1,ad had IN Intrigue with Sir William Wilde"
The letter went on to state that the
object OF Miss Travcrs in these proceed
wages Of disgrace she hadi 50 base1y treated
for and demanded should never be given to
her. In this note it WAS charged that the
libel lay, and certainly, unless its contents
could BE- explained Or justified, there appear
fact, were laid at two thousand pounds. AS
the trial, however, proceeded, 1t was shown
that Miss Travers had really yeutured upon
acts at which Lady Wilde nigh. naturally be
annoyed, and to which she might reasonably
,lully written and published pamphlet,
cbarcias Sir William Wilde with having nd
ministerial cltloEofoEn to her for criminal
purpose, ard this pamphlet she had circulated
lud advertised with provoking obtru,iveness.
She employed ncwshoys to cry and sell the
lar newspaper calling attention to the pabli~
cation. She seat Lady Wilde prospectus OF
| it, aud whcE Sir William was 1ccturing in The
Metropolitan Hall She took quantity Of
| copies there in q cab. Moreover, she put to
| this pamphlet Ean1e which Lady Wide had
hccn in the habit Of adopting in her own lite
| ray character. and she coupled this name
| and Sir Williams in placard advertising the
| publication. Tie tables, therefore, were ap-
| i,arcntly turned, and Lady Wilde seemed to
| have some wnrrant for the remonstFance she
had addressed to Hiss Trayers's father. It re-
manned, however, still to 1e seen what mo-
1ives Miss Traycrs could allege Tor her con-
duct, and under what pr5vocati1n tue resort
ed to such proceedings. This lady stated in
! Effect that, utter srlne years Of acquaintance
i with Sir William Wilde, she had actually
been treated by him, if not through the
| agtncy Of chlorofornl, at any rate slbstan-
| ti:liy, as the pamphlet CHARGED, and that
a1ier the outrage lie had told her ehc was
| mad. This fnsinuaticn, coupled with the vio-
| lepcc to which she Lad BEEN subjected, had
reused her indignation, and she bad resorted
TO the proceedings described partly for the
| sake Of revenge, and partly with the desire Of
| ex,lanin: why Sir William mi zlt wish to re-
present hs as insane. She did not denv that
| she lad received money from Sir William
even subsequently to the time Of the alleged
of.rnse, Iu1 she also maintained that though
she had asked for money, it had often been
freely offered, sometimes refused, and
sometimes returned. The general conclusion,
these points is, that Sir William, having origi.
nally been introduced to her in his profes-
eional capacity, had taken great interest in
her affairs, Ind wished to bcfritnd her, and
had gradually placed himself on terms Of IN
tiraacy which were afterwards abused- She
tlen reta1iatcd Us b:st she could In the man
ncr which induced Lady Wilde to interfere
This being the general aspect Of the case, and
the evidence aud addresses On both sides Aay
Ing b.cn protracted through tho whole week
The Judge summed up On Saturday afternoon
and the jury, after upwards of an hours con
sidcsation, returned verdict for The plaintiff
With one farlhing damages and costs. Wt
cannot say that we are surprised at this con
clusion, dIspro1'ortionate as it may appc3
| when measured against the cxertfons OF tn
litlgants or the length and excitement Of th'
appear 10 be the hardest, for She had bec1
subjected 20 annoyances which it was alt1os
impossible to endure, and she had tukc1
What seemed to her the most proper course
in writing privately to the father Q
tue lady who gave her cause q com
her letter were inde1cnstble. Had Lad,
wilde simply called upon DR.. Travers to re
strain his daughter from annoying ler, sh'
: could hardly have l,een blamed but the act
ual terms and charges Of the letter seem Il
lave been regarded " the ]ury as lbellous
; go that the plaintiff got verdict, thougl
) with nominal DAMAGES Sir William Wild
; md Miss Ifayers must apparently haye becl
guilty Of, at any rate, so much indlscretiol
that neither can we'll complain Of the result
Of The trial. It will perhaps be asked how .
lady Of education like Miss IEayers s1ouis
lave been so uncared for as to fail into thcs'
troubles; and the answer Is supplied. Dr
| Traycr5 is a very learned and very worthy
! Int yery eccentric man. He is described as
studlous reclusc, devoted to his books, bu
negligent Of his private o fairs. His wife, Wit
might have relieved him OF some Of thes'
cares. has long been separated from him hi!
sons have e1nigrated to Australia and SO i
came TO pass that his daughter was dePrlVec
Of protection and guidance We can onl,
think It unfortunate TINT 50 much scanda
was ever allowed to become public. Il
must have been solely, we should thtnk
from the position Of the parties Vs., that a,t5t t5!
have arisen. The defendant could on1J
hope tobe completely acquitted through snct
| ap opiniop Of the PLAINTIFF case as the jnr1
| we're not prepared to entertain; while, what
| ever wrong the plaintiff may be believed tt
have sustained, It i, clear that her measures
IF retaliation :sere unjusti8ab!eln in themselves
A. between plaintiff and defendant, the jur,
did find that the former was in the right ane
. the latter in the wrong; but, on the othel
band, the reduction to one farthing Of dana
scs which had been latd at two Thousand
.. pounds carried with It most dlsparagin&
xicw Of the Injury which the plaintiff had sui
terd from the ottense. 1ishmen are impct
nous and denonetratire, and forensic elo
! qucpce is Such a CHARACTERISTIC of their rac,
than we can readily believe IL to have bee1
powerfully displayed even In q cause like this
but Eugllshmen will probably wonder Loy
80 much interest could have been excited O
50 much professional energy employed
CurcAoo-Ouf Acknowledgements arc due +