be then should be restored to his conjugal rights. They went to the North together, and resided at the house of Mr. Nesbitt, the lady's father, and here he was astonished to find that his wife more peremptorily insisted on separate beds. While he was thus agitated to discover from what cause this conduct of his wife could arise, a letter by chance fell into his hands, directed in a coarse hand for Me Laidi El gin." On opening the envelope, he was astonished to find a letter from the defendant, couched in such passionate language, as left no room to doubt of the dishonour which had been imposed upon him. This at once solved the mystery of his wife's conduct, and led to the discovery of a correspondence, which he found was carried on under covers to two female servants. Those letters he held in his hand; and from such parts as he would read, the jury would see what in finite pains had been taken to seduce the affection of that lady from her husband. Mr. Garrow here read extracts from the letters of the defendant, which were couched in the most impassioned language. He then read her ladyship's letters to her husband while he remained in France after her return to England, which were replete with affectionate expressions of feeling for the situation of her husband. Hlaving concluded, he called upon the jury to give the plaintiff the most ample damages for the injury he had sustained from the defendant. William Hamilton and John Moreir, two gentlemen attached to the embassy, and who accompanied lord Elgin to Constantinople, spoke of the affectionate terms in which the plaintiff and his wife appeared to live together. Mr. R. Stirling stated, that he was one of the English arrested in Paris in May, 1803; at that time he visited lord Elgin, and Mr. Fergusson was one of the party. Lord and lady Elgin appeared to live upon the best terms. Captain Donnellan, of the Narcissus, carried lord and lady Elgin from Athens, in a tour round the Greek Islands in 1803, and they appeared very happy together. General Murray and Mr. Charles Duff gave the same testimony. This evidence, with the letter which had been read by Mr. Garrow, and which the defendant's counsel admitted had been truly read, formed the plaintiff's case. Mr. Topping, for the defendant, addressed the jury in an able speech, in mitigation of damages. He contended, that there was no proof of the aggravated circumstances stated by Mr. Garrow, and that it did not appear that there was any violation of hospitality.-With respect to the letters, they were a most ridiculous medley of love and madness, or love run mad, and would dis. grace the worst novel of the last century. He acknowledged the high character of lord Elgin, and only entreated the jury not to act from feelings of anger; but that they would measure out their da mages with calmness and justice.-Verdict-Damages ten thousand pounds! 23. As the Salisbury coach was coming to town last night, the fog was so thick, the coachman could not see his way; and at the en. trance of the little town of Bedfont, near Hounslow, the horses went off the road into the pond called the King's Water,dragging the coach along with them. A very fine young man, about 25 years of age, LI 4 of of the name of Lockhart Wain right, was killed on the spot. He was dressed in the uniform of the 9th light dragoons. The water is about two feet deep, with a soft bottom of mud, about two feet more. Whe. ther he was suffocated in the mud, or killed by a blow, cannot be ascertained. When dragged out of the water, he appeared to have received a very violent contusion on his forehead. The body was con. veyed to the Duke's Head publichouse, in Bedfont. In the inside of the coach were four females, the wife of the deceased (formerly miss Pearce),her maid, a Swiss governess in the family of the marquis of Abercorn, and another lady. They all narrowly escaped drowning. No. thing but the speedy assistance from Bedfont could have saved them. Above 100 persons were assembled in a few moments, most of them soldiers from Bedfont. The sol diers leaped into the water, and extricated the ladies from their perilous situation; the body of the coach lying on its side, with one of the horses drowned, and the rest kicking and plunging violently. The inside passengers were bruised, but not dangerously. Mr. Wainright owed his death to his humanity. The night being very severe, he had given his place inside to his maid, and mounted the box beside the cachman, with whom he was conversing at the time of the accident. A fatal accident happened a short time ago near the village of Hopton Wale s, in Shropshire. it appears, that a waggoner was to rise early on the following morn ing to accompany his master's - team to Ludlow, to fetch grain; on the night preceding, he dreamt that the waggon would be overturn. ed, and crush him to death ere he returned. Upon mentioning this extraordinary dream to his wife, she advised him not to go, but to plead the excuse of illness to his master; but unwilling to do this, and being firmly persuaded that the dreadful catastrophe would hap pen the next time he went with the team, he set out; on his return, being fatigued with his journey (instead of taking every precau tion to prevent the accident he so much dreaded), he unthinkingly got upon the shafts and fell asleep; he had not been thus situated long, when the horses, being left to their own guidance, and the ground entirely covered with snow, the animals mistook their way, and went several yards out of the road; by which means the waggon was thrown on one side, and fell on the unfortunate sufferer, who was taken up a corpse. He was a most valuable servant, and had lived upwards of twenty years in his last place. It is melancholy to relate, that he has left a very large family to bewail his loss; all of whom he took leave of ere he set out on his journey, in the full persuasion that he should never see them more. 26. An inquisition was taken at Little Hatch, on the Acton road, on the body of H. R. Vanduke, esq. who met his death on Christ. mas evening, by falling over a ban. nister to the depth of about thirty feet. It appeared in evidence, that the deceased, who was recently a merchant residing in Broad-street, and who lately took up his resi dence in the neighbourhood of Putney, went to the house of his sister at the place above named, with his son and daughter; and on being about to retire at nine o'clock, the deceased made a trip in some baize at the door of the drawingroom, by which he fell over the bannisters, and did not alight until he fell on the stones in the hall of the kitchen. His head was frac. tured, besides being shockingly bruised; but he appeared lost to pain, and died in a very short time. -Verdict, Accidental Death. A gentleman of respectability, of the name of Alcott, who resided at the house of Mrs. M'Coulley, in Oxford-street, put a period to his existence, by nearly severing his head from his body with a razor.The deceased was an officer in a regiment of the line; and it is supposed that he committed suicide in a fit of despondency, occasioned by a disappointment in his affections for a female, who had received his visits for the last twelve months, and who was married on Sunday last to a rival. A Mr. Woodley, near Cork in Ireland, has advertised a mansion and demesne not far from that city, to let on lease for the term of nine thousand nine hundred years. Court of King's Bench-illegitimate child. The King v. Henry Luff. The defendant was the reputed the reputed father of a bastard child, of the body of one Mary Taylor, the wife of one Henry Taylor, who was ab. sent from his wife, and had not ac. cess to her at the supposed period of the procreation, but who returned just previous to the birth of the child. Two justices made an or. der of bastardy against Luff, and upon appeal to the sessions, the same was confirmed. It now moved to quash the order of justices, and the or was der of sessions, upon the follow. ing grounds.-1st, That it appeared by the order, that Mary Taylor had been examined to prove the non-access of her husband, which by law she could not be admitted to do. -2dly, That the statutes 6 Geo. II. c. 31. and 18 Elizabeth, which give the justices power to make an order of affiliation, do not apply, except as to cases where the bas tard is born of a single woman; and lastly, that it appeared by the order, in terms, that the husband had access to his wife during a part of the period of her pregnancy, and therefore by the law of England the child was not a bastard, but the legitimate issue of the husband. The material words of the order, upon which the questions occurred, were" Whereas it appears to us, as well upon the oath of Mary Taylor as otherwise, that the said H. Taylor had not access to her from the 9th of April, 1804, till the 9th day of June, 1806," the child being born upon the 13th day of July, 1806, being about a fortnight after the return of H. Taylor to cohabit with his wife. The case was argued by Mr. Stokes, for the respondents, and Mr. Wilson, Mr. Alderson, aud Mr. King, for the appellants, and the following cases were cited-Rex v. Alberton, 1 Lord Raym. 395; 2. Salk. 483; Rex v. St. Bride's; 1. Str. 51; Pendrel v. Pendrel, 2. Ser. 925; 2. Bott. 447, Rex v. Bedall, 2. Str. 1073; Thomson v. Saul, 4. Term Rep. 356; Rex v Reading, Ca. Temp. Hard. 79. Lord Ellenborough, chief justice. Three objections have been ta. ken to this order-First, that the wife is supposed to have been exa. mined generally upon oath as to the fact of the non-access of her husband, and that the conviction is founded upon the evidence of the wife alone. Whereas it is laid down, that an order of this kind cannot be made on the evidence of the wife alone, but there must be other evidence of the non-access. The next objection is, as to the statute of the 6 Geo. H. cap. 31. and the 18 of Eliz. The order is founded upon one of those statutes, and it is now made a question, whether this case comes within them; and next, that this is a legitimate child born within lawful wedlock, inasmuch as it appears that the father returned within a fortnight before the birth of the child, and it must, by law, be taken to be his child. As to the first objection, does it appear to be founded on the evidence of the wife only? The evidence of other persons than the wife is required upon principles of general policy. For it would be highly inconvenient, that a wife should be examined at all in any matter likely to produce disputes between man and wife. However, there is an exception as to this rule, that she may be examined of necessity as to those facts which she only can speak to. But as she can only be examined in matters of necessity, now it is necessary to shew by the evidence of the wife, whether any person had that sort of illicit intercourse which laid a foundation for the birth of this child. To that extent she might be admitted as a competent evidence to prove the illicit intercourse with the adulterer. Perhaps, also, she was competent to prove that no other person than the adulterer, on whom the charge of maintenance of the child is to fall, had any intercourse with her : for these facts are peculiarly and solely within her knowledge. lo the extent of the adurous intercourse it is clear sh: must be examined. Does it, then, appear. that she was exam and beyond that? The order is, it appears, "as well upon the oath of the said Mary Taylor as otherwise." The words are not as well upon the exa mination of Mary Taylor upon oath as otherwise;" for then it would be open to the objection which has been made, and there would arise an inference that the other evidence was not upon oath, whereas here the inference is, that both kinds of evidence were upon oath. The order does not distinguish to what parts of the case Mary Taylor spoke: but it appears that other evidence was given; for the words, or otherwise," must mean other proof, as in the case of the king v. Bedali. And if we find the wife to have been cxamined with others, we will intend that she was not examined as to the proof of access, which cannot legally be proved by her; but that she spoke to such facts as she might well prove, and that the want of access was proved by other compe. tent testimony. Here, it is to be observed, that the words," or otherwise," do not occur accidentally, and in one place only in the order, but are repeated.—There is, therefore, no foundation for the first objection. As to the second objection, it in effect resolves itself into the third. For when it is made a question, whether the sta tutes apply to any cases but where the children are not born in lawful matrimony, it resolves itself for the purpose into the question, whether the child is born in lawful matrimomy for the purpose of these acts, and whether a child born in adultery is a child which these acts had in contemplation as much as bastards under other circumstances? and this we think is the true construction of these acts. Then the question is, whether the return of the husband within any limited time before the period of gestation is expired, does or does not cast upon him the character of father of that child incontrovertibly, according to the law of this country? This is an important question; and as there has been something said about the novelty of some of the doctrines to be advanced, one would be extremely sorry, not to find oneself warranted by ancient authorities. Now in Roll's Abridge ment, 358, where the most ancient authorities from the Year-books are cited, it is stated in the text that, by the law of the land, no man born after espousals can be a bastard, unless for special matter." This exception is engrafted upon the rule, and the first special matter is exactly what in fact occurs here, where there is a natural impossibility that the husband should be the father of the issue. As where there is a natural impossibility from his being under the age which renders procreation possible, as where he is eight or nine years old. And there is a case in the Year-books, where the husband was only under fourteen years of age. But that is not the only instance: There is the case of Foxcroft, 10 Edw. I. where the first husband was ill a month before his death, and had no access to his wife, and afterwards the child being born within forty wecks and eleven days, it When, was held to be a bastard. ted |