Obrázky stránek
PDF
ePub

cumstance. Mr. Macdonnell, a medical gentleman, who had attended the lady at her delivery, thought he had seen her before, though he could not at the time recollect where. Not long after, however, he met Mr. Pennington near the forest, who was then seeking for evidence against Lowe, and the circumstance led to a full developement of the affair, Mr. Macdonnell recollecting that Mrs. Pennington was the same lady he had delivered. This occurred in the month of November, 1819; and, immediately after, Mr. Pennington commenced legal proceedings against the defendant. But what did the jury suppose had been the conduct of the adulterer on that occasion? Why, in forty-eight hours after, he had the impudence as well as the cruelty to arrest Mr. Pennington for a supposed debt due to him for the maintenance of the husband's four children, the husband himself not having the slightest knowledge of the transaction. If it should be said that this action could not be maintained because the husband and wife were not living together at the time the adultery took place, then he (Mr. Serjeant Pell) should lament, for the character of the country, and for the best interests of society, that such a defence could be tolerated. He should lament that because a husband and wife happened, from peculiar circumstances, to live apart from each other, a license should thereby be afforded to any wicked man to perpetrate his designs on female virtue. Several witnesses having proved the facts stated by the counsel for the plaintiff,

This

Mr. Serjeant Vaughan then addressed the jury for the defendant. He commented on the leading points of the statement made by Mr. Serjeant Pell, and contended that the plaintiff could not be legally considered entitled to damages, as he had been living apart from his wife at the time the adultery took place. was the main point of the learned Serjeant's argument, and he adduced several authorities in support of it, observing at the same time, that the plaintiff could not have been ignorant, for a long period previously, of the terms upon which the defendant and his wife lived together. It was also remarkable, he said,

that after the death of the lady's father, the husband and wife had not come again together. What did this show?-not that they were affectionate towards each other, but that their differences were irreconcilable. He conjured the jury not to treat the case as if the parties had lived, up to the period when the adultery was committed, in harmony and conjugal happiness with each other."

No witnesses were called on the part of the defendant.

Lord Chief Justice Dallas then proceeded to deliver his charge to the jury. His lordship took a luminous and comprehensive view of the law of the case, and said, that with great deference to the high opinions of Lord Kenyon, Mr. Justice Ashurst, Mr. Justice Buller, and Mr. Justice Grose, who held a contrary doctrine, he could not bring himself to believe, that because a man happened to be separated from his wife at the time, he was not in a state to bring an action against a person who had seduced her. It was very true that the fact of his separation might very materially affect the amount of damages; but it ought not to be put in as a bar against the action, the best interests of morality being decidedly opposed to such a doctrine. It would be extremely severe, indeed, if a man, who, perhaps from untoward circumstances, found it necessary to live separated from his wife, was to have a spurious offspring foisted upon him, and his honour injured in the tenderest point, without being able to maintain an action against the adulterer. His lordship, after urging some further arguments to this effect, said he should reserve the point in question for the future consideration of the court; observing, that if the jury should now return a verdict for the plaintiff, a nonsuit might afterwards be entered if his opinion should not be sustained.

The jury then retired, and after remaining absent about twenty minutes, returned a verdict for the plaintiff-Damages, Two Hundred and Fifty Pounds.

ARCHES COURT.-Nov. 14.

ALLEGED MISCONDUCT OF THE REV. SAMUEL G. DAVIES.

This was a case which had been removed by letters of request from the Consistorial Court on the Diocese of Oxford to the Arches Court of Canterbury. Seventeen articles were presented against the Rev. Mr. Davies, curate of Chalbury, and minister of the parish and chapel of Chaddington, in Oxfordshire, charging him with a variety of acts of profaneness, immorality, drunkenness, indecency, and indecorum, both in his private conduct, and in the discharge of his ecclesiastical functions.

The chief of the articles admitted by the court, (after hearing arguments of counsel as to their admissibility) were, the charge of his coming to church to perform divine service in a state of inebriety, from excessive drinking and intoxication. Also at a vestry meeting at the parish church of where he

officiated as curate, particularly on the 24th of April, 1821, so that he could not take the chair. His expressing himself in private conversation to a respectable parishioner, named Evans, with great indecency"Give me a good horse, and five shillings, and I will ride to Hell and back again in two days, against the whole parish." His having taken upon him, of his own authority, to change the hour of church service from eleven to twelve, to the great inconvenience of the majority of parishioners; and next, his reading the church service with such rapidity, as to make it utterly impossible to hear distinctly what was said.

Sir John Nichol here observed, it might or might not be shown, that it rested with the clergyman to appoint his own hour. He was of opinion that was a matter which rested with himself. If it was found inconve nient to the bulk of his parishioners, they might complain of the inconvenience to the Diocesan. With respect to the article" habitual and excessive drinking," the learned judge thought, if several instances could be proved that would bear out the offence charged, and

this article was admissible as conduct highly indecorous in a clergyman in holy orders, the court would credit or discredit the evidence upon the whole of the case. With respect to the language. made use of to Mr. Evans, that certainly was an indecency of expression for which a person of his calling was subject to be admonished. The eleventh article charged conduct of a still more criminal and scandalous nature, namely, that the defendant, having a certain pupil in his house, a young gentleman between the age of fourteen and sixteen, suffered the said pupil to lay in the same bed with himself and wife. That this was publicly and repeatedly witnessed by the servants, and by every body in the house, and was notorious to all the neighbours, to the great scandal of religion and morals. That he suffered the said pupil to go to bed to his (the defendant's) wife, and to lay in bed together, both being. naked. That such had been habitually witnessed both before the said pupil went to the University of Oxford, and after his return from College, where he remained three years up to 1816.

The thirteen articles were all admitted, with the exception of certain modifications for the sake of technical forms, which the court directed should be reformed in those respects.

THE DUMB LOVER.

[Having met with this tale among a collection of "Avantures Gallantes et Comiques," under the title of " Le Muet Babillard," and not being aware of its introduction into our language, we have translated it purposely for this publication.]

Or all the vices of society, hypocrisy appears to me one of the most considerable, since it often conceals the most wicked projects under specious appearances: therefore, I think it a meritorious undertaking, to undeceive the public with respect to any erroneous opinions they may have conceived; and I flatter myself, that no one will blame either the subject of this history, or the punishment with which it terminates.

Paris is, of all the cities of France, that where one finds the greatest number of singular adventures; and nothing can be more diverting, or even more instructive, than a collection of anecdotes of this great city. A widow, whose name I shall conceal under that of Dorothea, acquired there a very great reputation. Her family was illustrious, and her wealth so considerable, that, although she was neither handsome nor young, she had a crowd of lovers, who all being attracted by the charms of her riches, sought with earnestness the means of pleasing her, which however appeared extremely difficult.

The devotion of Dorothea was most exemplary; she scrupled even to turn her head towards her confessor, and a look or a glance appeared to her a crime. She was seen to visit every day most of the churches in Paris; to go through the different hospitals; and to give considerable alms to the poor. In fact, it was upon these vain appearances she acquired só general a reputation for piety, that they called her the holy widow. Nevertheless, her lovers most assiduously endeavoured to persuade her that marriage was at least as agreeable to God as so rigid a widowhood. Some of them had gained over her confessor to their side; and others, under the mask of hypocrisy, followed her in her pious courses: but all these attentions made no impression on her. She wished, (she said) by an austere celibacy, to atone for the pleasures of the flesh and other worldly vanities she had partaken of during her marriage. These sentiments, and her disdainful manners, did not dishearten her numerous pretended admirers-se powerful is interest over the minds of men. They continued to put in play all the schemes imaginable to entrap Dorothea, and there was but one, named Alizart, more honest and less greedy than the others, who abandoned so difficult a project--but notwithstanding his retreat, the number of her supplicants was not less considerable.

While these things were going on, there arrived at Paris a young gentleman of good family, but so extremely poor, that the most humble hotel in the city appeared to him still above his means. He happened to descend in the neighbourhood of the widow, and was not long before he heard her spoken of as a prodigy of piety. This young man, whom I shall name Silmander, informed himself of her proceedings, and was not at a loss to perceive that an inordinate vanity and ostentation were the principal incentives to Dorothea's conduct. Silmander possessed con

« PředchozíPokračovat »