The Warwickshire Herald. — 1885-04-04 (Birmingham, West Midlands, England)

MRS. WELDON CHARGED WITH LIBEL. At the Old Bailey, on Monday, the trial of Mrs. Weldon for having published a false and malici. one libel of and concerning M. Rivßre was con. cluded.—Mr. Montagu Williams and Mr. Matthews represented the prosecution, and the defendant conducted her case in person. Upon the case be. ing called on, Mr. Montagu Williams said that the defendant having placed on the record a plea of justification and demurred, he had to hand in a joinder in demurrer, and prayed for judgment.—After some argument the judge said he must enter judgment for the Crown on the demurrer. As Mr. Williams had suggested that Mrs. Weldon should be allowed some indulgence, he would give her leave to plead over. He might, however, inform her that certain parts of her plea were irrelevant. The first of these was that which contained RR eulogy of herself. If she were an angel it would be no defence to the indictment, as they were not investigating her character, but that of M. Rivßre. In the second part she expressed a wish that there was a Curt of Criminal Appeal in order to reverse the decision of the Recorder. It was impossible for that court to sit as a court of appeal from the Recorder.—Mr. Montagu Williams then proceeded to open the case for the prosecution' drawing particular attention to the fact that the libels, which were contained in a paper entitled "Social Salvation," were published for the second time in January, 1885. Mrs. Weldon charged M. Rivil•re with being a bigamist, with having centnutted forgery, and with having undergone a term of ten years' penal servitude. It certainly never could be allowed that people should publish such libels as these to gratify their own private inalignity.—Evidance was then called to prove the publication of the libel. One of the witnesses, named Lynch, Mated that after he had made the purchase of the copy of Social Sal ration Harcourt challenged him to tight. They did fight, and it was very satisfactory to himself. (Laughter.)— Mrs. Weldon, in opening her case, contended that she had a right to go into the whole of her case from the commencement of the alleged libels in 1880: The Common Serjeant said she must confine herself to the libels charged in the indictment. He would consider the question of reserving the point for the Court of Crown Cases Reserved.—Mrs. NVelden then proceeded to contend at length that the libels wero true, and that it was for the public benefit that they were published. The plaintiff was examined at soda, length by Mrs. Weldon, ;who read nearly the whole of the correspondence which had taken place between them six years ago relating to her engagements at the prosecutor's concerts. Mrs. Weldon then put questions to M. Riviere, in reply to which he stated that eight years after his marriage in England, the lady with win in he had been living in France committed suicide. He said also that it was true that lie was convicted in France, in the year 18i7, of havieg , misappropriated money in his business, and that he was declared a bankrupt, and sentenced in his absence to 10 years' traverse fore, s. He said he was not aware that by the Coda Napoleon any ip.eresn who was so convicted was for the rest of his life under police supervision. Mrs. Weldon read the article in the code which enacted this, and said that her object in doing so was to chew that she was justified in describing M. Ilivi'ere as an outlaw, in the alleged libel. M. Rivii,re said that when he left France, after his bankruptcy, he in the first instance went to Belgium. He afterwards came to England. From the further examination of M. Rivi'ere by Mrs. Weldon, it appeared that one of the Causes of the original dispute between the parties was that M. Rivie-re had refused to carry out an arrangement the latter was alle7ed to have entered into with Mrs. Weldon to give 300 members of the choir and 200 friends admission to the theatre. M. Riviera said that he declined to carry out such an arrargement, because he considered it entirely impracticable, as it would have so filled the theatre that persons who desired to pay would not have been able to obtain admission. Prosecutor denied that when the agreement as to the engagements between them for the concerts was signed, defendant was told that certain portions of it, which afterwards turned out to be very important, were merely matters of form.—The Common Serjeant, who had several times complained to Mrs. Weldon was introducing irrelevaut matter, here pointed out that she had not adduced any evidence to support her charge against M. Rivil2.re of being a bigamist, and if she failed to establish any portion of her plea of justification she failed on all.— The prosecutor, cross-examined by Mr. Montagu Williams, denied the defendant's allegations of fraudulent bankruptcy in Paris, and said that since 1861 he had been repaying his creditors, from whom he had letters thanking him for his honourable behaviour. In a further cross-examination he gave a general denial of the other allegations in the libel. —After a good deal of legal discussion, the Common Serjeant ruled that Mrs. Weldon had failed to make out her charge that M. Ileviere had committed bigamy, and he called upon her to address the jury nylon the only points that remained, which were whether the publication of the libels had been proved, whether the libels related to M. Revßre, and whether they were privileged tommunications.—Mrs. Weldon accordingly proceeded to address the jury. The Common Serjeant having summed up, the jury found Mrs. Weldon guilty, and she was sentenced to six months' imprisonment without hard labour, and ordered to enter into recognizances, herself in £lOO and two sureties of CO each, for her good behaviour during two years.