Warwick, Monday, August 1...
The Times, 1824-08-19T00:00:00

UIVIlJ SIDE.-(Reore Lord Clif Justice BEsT.) A niswas an action rO ed rctionuof the plaintiff's daughiter, whereby lie was dteprived of het tetio tes. Alf. -Sergeant VAUGHLAN, in opening the case to the jury, stated, that the Plaintiff was a man whlose circumsrtarnces were limiited, but upon whom devolved the extenisive responsibility of leading a famiily of six chilldren in thle paths of virtue and honesty, and of taking eare that, by their badl concluct, they did not set a pernicious examiple to each other. The ieery ought to understandl that it was not the girl herself (who, howeier ininocently shie might be betrayed into an in- discretion, wauld niot, perhaps, be a favoured. ob ject) thaut was now applying at tlAeer handsa for a reparation frorm her seducer, but the heart-broken fathier2 weeping over his Wrongs, wbo sooght some re- dres.s for the great injury wvhich hehad suffThred by thedlisgrace inflicted upon his chiild. it had been often said, thiat there was no class of cases, thne circumustanices of which viaried so muich as those si-,iilar to the present. The true tes,tfor estim-ating thieamount ofinJur doe waa by inquiring into vwhat the in'tured party hid lost Let tie jisry contrast the situationi of this unhapy girl now,WRh whiat eit badi been before she hiad been robbedof her fame by the artifices of the de- fendant. In the class; of life to which she belonged, marriage wasi a legitimatte anti honourable object of ambitioa. Whien she failed of thzat, all hier prospects of a resp-ectable and comfortable settlemnent for life might be said to b.-clouded'. The jury,tvmany of whom were fathers, would appreciate a parent's feelings undler circumstances like thec Present. Ile (the learnied Sergeant) challenged inquiry into the conduct of thisi fathier to his chiildren previous to this unrortutnate transaction. The victins of the seduction was at the time only 1.5 Years of age, she was of a genitle, confiding disposition, and no care had beeni lost to give her an education suitable to her station, whilch, if it did not embrace all the refinemciots of a hiighly-polishted course of insrtruction, was at least such a one as to qualify her to fill respectably her walk in the middling ranks of life. It would be shown that her conduct, as well as thiat of' her parents, was above reproach. It would be shiown that the defendant's con- cluct was mnost poigznantly aggravated by the circuimstance of his deserting hter and marrying aniother, at the time that she had time strongest claims upon his protection atnd attenitoni. It would be showni that he carried on his planst of destruictioni by sya- tent, anid that he did not stop at prontituting thie Tmot sacred p',o- mites Ato further his guilty ends.. But he wished the jury to receive their impressionls of it, not from his -statement, but froml the evi- dencee. It would be for his learned frienlis on the other side to im- peach the character of this uuhappy girl, if thev couild,H lie ad no doubt that when the juiry saw that her youthi anid inexperience had beent practised upon, her affections gained by deceitful profesions, and her c-rnfldence bas-elv won by a pros3titution of the most solemn pledges, they would give such damnages as wouldi not only repair the individual injury, but operate as a protection to Society. Alary Tuirner, a good-looking girl, was then put into the box, Hler age appea%red to be about Ill. Shie was embarrassted at filet, hut after a little timie was able to proceed.-i ans the plaintiff's daught- ter. It is now thiree years ago since I first became acquaintetd with James Edwards. I shall be 18 in October. The defendant paid me visits at miy fathier's; house. He often came. sometimnes as often as five or six timnes a week. i-I was received as miy suitor, anid he made profession of visiting at theo bous9e in that character. He ha.s often uttered tome the mosAthoriouarable prdteata-ions. One Thurs- day night he came, and, with a particular warmath of nmanner, told rie lie had given the parish-clerk money to pay for our marriage. lie gave mne reason to think that it wotild take Place in three weeks. W'e went to Birminlgham to buiy thte ring. Hei paid for it in a shop in my presence. We then walked abouit a little way, when he said it was too late to be married that day, but that he would take mne to church with himi the nea.,t 'Auntlay. We went hiome toge- ther that time to myv mother's house. After being hiere a short timie, he ptoposed to mne to accomntany him to the Wag. gon and Horses, whiere we stayed together. He had told mne that he would nmarry me on the Sunday following, and repeated what he hail before saidt at Birminghiam-that it was his full intesi- tion to have married nie that day, if it had inot been too late whets we came there. I was deceived so much by these assurances, that I yielded to his pressing solicitations of remaining withi him till momn- tug. In the morning, I reproached him, and calledI upon him to accomplish his promise of mnarrying ine. it was not long until the consiequence of my misconduct left ire no longer capable of con- cealingb my shamre.' The defendant not only refused to retleem his p ledges, but has sincee married another. [ffere the witness was so af- fectesl, tlaat s4he fairnted away.1 I gave birth to a child on the 10thi of Februariy last, the fruit of our criminal intercourse. Mfy father's family consists of four sisters a,ntione brother. The defenidant is292 years of age, and he is the son of a nail-factor at Birminglham. I isave heard him. say that he was to conse into his father's business as soon as lie was 21. Croas-examined by Mlr. Co.Mkmo- SERGEANT.-I live at Old- bury with my parents. MVy Unit company keeping with thie dlefend- ant was in 1821. He livedi at Netlierton, which is about four miles. fromi our house. Ou r fi rst mneeting was at a dance at thie Swan puib- lie-house, at Rowley. I was with iny mothier and a few friends, but myy mother paid no attention to my conduet. She was with our friends at the other end of the room. I went OU t W ithl the defendan t to thettouse of a neighbour named Bridgewater where I sttayed all night. The defendant bad left me at ten co'cioc~c, having been with me four hours. The next evening hemet me at Nethierion, and we stayed together from six until ten. I nev'er walked in the fields at night Wvithi a youing mail namedI Parki. I know Park ; he lived at Hal.es Owen, about four miles from Oldbunry. I remem- ber going over to Hales Owen about two years ago, to the house of a Mlr. WVoods. Park lived next door, and I we-nt one night to his housie at the invitaion of his sister. I howevcr returneAd 'o Mr. Woods', anid slept there. Mfrs. Woods is a rsarried womani, but her husband was from home that night. I remnember being at a Air. M1arshall's with a young man named Thornton. It wias too late to go borne. I certainly refused to sleep with Allrs. Marshall, but sat up all night with Thorntos, and in the morning went into Mrs. Marshall's bed. I -will swear that Thiorni- ton never came up stairs to me. I went home with him ihat night ; we were in the fields together three hours. It was in the dark, of a sumnmer'a evening. The day I returned from Birm-ingham with the defendanit I did not go homie, but went to sleep with the dlefendant at the Waggon and Horses. I was acquainted with tile landladt(y. Mly mnothier knew I wasi there, my fathier did not. I remeniber being at Hlagley wake with Thornton, in 1822. I continued with him fromn foi ilabout eleven at night. The disitance was only four m-iles, anid it took us that time to gro across the Seldis. I never saidI I I preferred Thormnti's little finger to Edwards's whole body.' I have not yet sworni the child to any one. Re-examined.-..I never had tlime slighitest imnproper acquaintanice witht Thiornton, or aniv body else but thie defeniriant. Jante Taylor, examined by Mr. Sergeant VAtJOHAN.-I keep the Wlaggnn ansd Horses at Oldbury. I remember the night that MIary Turner and the defendant stopped at my house. Thiey asked for a bemi. I asked the det'endant whiether he had mTarried her ; aiid he said. he jose had that day at Biriningham. I hatve siince heard himi say lie had miarried aitotber womati. Crm-expiied-Th n-otterof Mary Turiser caine to my house tha nilit Sle akedmewhere the girl was, and I told her she had gone up-stairs with Edwards. She said no more, bitt went liomne. IWe thought thte parties were married. It was iMary TIur- ner I and not Edwards,, whio asked for the bei]. CHinES JTus-ricE (to witness).-Did you thlink this was thte con. 'duct of a modest womian?P Do you think a proper woman would comie in thils way withi a young man, to a public-house, and ask for a bed ? WViiness.-Al.y Lord, I saw nothing improper in hier conduct. This was the-Vlaintiff's; cas.-. Tie Comti osrSEGEoANT then rose to address the jury for thje defendant, liewould ask the learned counsel whether hecduld seri- ously say that this wyas a cause for damage, mnore espe- cially when it was stated thtat the defenidant was only twentv yearsi of age, an.' that lils father was a m-an in Iimnitjd circumnstanices? In treating such cases as this, was every thing to be expecte(i fromn the forbearance of a young man of warm feelings,, to whom every possible opportunity antd Facility was affbrded by the girl's parents, and nothing fzom thoe-e p-arents, who.se care It oughlt to be to keep, their chiild out of the way of teniptation ? Ought it no! to be shown as the h'ounclation of this action, tL-at nothinig ha(' been wanting on the part of the Parentsl to preserve flimt,' child fromz ruin ? Wm~ there in this ease any mark eveAi of the most ordiniary attention ? flow did the p arties firve mecet ? 'mVhy at a public-heuise where, amnidst allthe excirement and confusion of a dance, they are permitted to Withdraw 9ttemsielves from observation ; and thisq utter stranger, as the defen?elnt than was to the girl, is wholly freed fromn the restraitits whicls'ylnother's vigilancecould place upon him. Tue jury htimd them le-A'ig the houase together : still no solicitude, no suspicions excite(' in tile bosom of this spotless mother , no inquiriea sat to the cause rfthe daughter's absence ; no reproach to the defen- dant whes he 'i afterwards mt with he:r, but on the contrary, he itt pem tted tsntinue his visits as before. Was this the conduct of a arent-ibs' would not say a conscientioexs one-bett of a parent w osefi t dnty it was3 to watch over t he morals oif her daughter ? D1ic. to the feelings of a parent miglht perhiaps indluce him to ab- suotiorom remarking on the cireumstanc-es under which these Young per,s1e came together, but his duty to his client obliged hiim to e,4ose their conduct, anti show how unworthiy they were of tlhe d a- /mages which they sought by this action. He had before commiented upon the conducet of the miother at- the patblic-house, but whlat did the jury think of her conduct after they had retuirned fro," Bir- minigham when it was well known that no marriage had taken place? The giri hmerself-..thiis innocent victins-in-stead of returninog tqi her father's house, go0es to a pubhic..house. atnd there herself m-akes ar. rangements for pasing the night with her betrayer, as be Wus call- ed. he lndlay o time house knows tb6 situationi of the pirties. is aquantedwit th girl's niother, who livedl only a few dc4rs ofF; and et nthin is on to apprise that most wronged of' women, of thesitatininwhch herdaugigter lied placed herself. And when this agonized parent did at length coine by cliance, what was her con- duct ? She turned on hir heel, andl wgi1ked coolly homeward4. Was" thits then, a case for damsags? What.proof wvas there that the de-. fentant wee the father of the child ? Was it -not likely that fromn the famnillarifies which the girl had confessed with T.i'ornton, thiat he oughit to have been made the defendlant in this tlction,and not Eo.. wards ? With respect to the fathter, it was in proof that he hadl not exerciacti that strict vigilance oyer his daughter whiich he ought; and the mother was positively privy to he-c dishonour. But he hoped. they would be taught itsI1 ar, that if they claimed protect-on for injured innocence, they shauldhave shown that-they iad gu.arded. their child agaiinst being led willingly into the paths of vice. -. b~ord Chiet Jostice REST,ill his charge to the jury, said the olain.. tiff's case rested entirelypoNn thje evidence of the unfortuntate girl lice. self. It was for thiein to say, af'ter thelife which, by herowr, conifessiois, she badl been leading for the last three or foaer years, how fax tube was en'titled to credit. He was; of opinion, that if they did finsl a vedct frtepait iff, the very smnallest sum of damages wopild satzsf rs iithe of nthit ae h ere one o h litit had himsesfpasu t7sis eazse upon the is.suc of the attention or regulart courseofthe parents to thisgirl. This wasrathera critical test for tiseplaintiffl; iorh(the learned Judge) was decidedly of opinion, that there never was a case in which greater profligacy of-neglect, had beens slows, bv parents towardst a child than by this plaintiff and hi. wife towards their daughter daring her courtship with .the defendant. Ittwas very true, that in the humbler walks of lMe there s iuot 4olways the sasise atterrtion paid to little decoruwts:; and the ordinary intercourse of partles, eircunistanced as they were, sometimes waested that delicacy which was observable amongst per. sons of more refined habits of thinking. But he put itto the jury as parents themselves, whether a virtuous and honest father would shut bis eyes to the conduct of his daughter, and suffer her, day by day, and year after year, to-conTduct hersedf as this girl conf'essed she haa been Peiitted to do. ore wris an Intercoarse-A sort of lax and irregular conuruhep$dmtencedso faiback as 1821, and suffiered to-go on for moniths togethetbet,een two YOung persons, the gfrl Ofvery ten- derage, and tbe defendant not 20. T9itpareaitshadtaright to seek for compensation forthertin ofti-.eirdauihter,there wasnodouabt; but was uothing due to the feingoP nf fathers, whose son4 had been seduced by the easy coranl lance of the girl, and the thamneful co-operation of the girl's mother? Thc.niry ought to be satitfied that the defendant WrA;t thie autthorof this girlas rnJa. Vor his pwn part, hehad nohc. sitation ir, saying, that lhe coasidered the mischlef to have been brought upon the young womnan by the parents themsehies, and that to their own doors ought the reproach ot her miscogduct to be laid, for Permitting such improper indulgencies. Parents coming to claim under such circuntuances, could not expect to make any great im- pression on juries. The jury dleliberated ss.nte very. hort timne, anl then found for the plaintifF-Darnages, One Shiling. _ WARWICKI. lIONnAY. Aiteirwr IR- .A UI1N;R V. EDWARDlS.