Secondaries' Office, Red ...
AL r. rARt; opened the pleadings. This was an action for cri- minal conversation with theplaintff's wrife. The damages werelaid at 20,0001., and the defendant had suffrered judgraent to go by de- fault. hlr. BnoUGHAMt stated the facts to the jury. He never rose to discharge his professional duty with feelings of more painful anxiety than he did upon this occasion-anxiety not arising from any doubt as to the result of this inquiry, but in consequence of a personal communication be had htad with the plaintiff; in which such apicture of misery had been represented to him, as it was impossible for kimto laybelo.re the5jury; for no words whichhecould command could passi- biy make it sensible to their minds - and in the course of this inves- tigation, it would not be the least painful part of their (the jury's) duty to contrzst the former happiness of these parties with their pre- sentstate of vretchedness. The p7aintiff was thc second son of an ho- nourable baronct, and descended from an ancient family in Scot}ad. He was a general officer in the army, sad had distinguished himself in thelate war; but hehad beenprecluded by indisposition fromsbar- ing the glory of those briliant exploits which closed that war with those i1ustrious men whose names it would be his (Mr. Brougham's) duty this day tobringundertheirnotice. LadyLouissErskine was a younger daughter of the late Earl and Countess of Uxbridge, and sister to the present distinguished Nlarquis of Anglesea, who had served in the late glorious campaign with the Duke of Wellington. In the year 1797, an attachment nas4bnonmed between Sir James 2nd this laAy-.sn attachment partaking more of romance than of reality. For a period, however, of four years, great obstacles presented them-' aelves i the way of their union, arisig from the circum- stance of botih parties being younger children, and ndither pos- sessed of sufficient fortune. 'hese obastlacles, however, *ere finaly overcome, and their union accomplished bv te interention of their la:te MajeadCs. They were married in 1801, and their passion in- stead or coeling increascd with yea.r DuLiug zte fourteen vears that succeeded their marriage, tbey lived in a state of uninterrapted happiness, which would be proved by the friends of the parties, and by persons of inferior station, who had an opportunity of obsersng them. In the year l8l, he succeeded to the baronetcy by the death of his elder brother, Sir Wom. irskbie; and in 15, he projected a visit to Paris to see his old associates in arms, wvth whom he had served in the Peninsula; but with whom he was prevented by indisposition, as was before stated, from continu- ing to serae down to its glorious termination. He therefore leg Englantl with Lady Louisa, and ioined the armv at Paris soon after the battle of Waterloo. Up to tlat moment it was impossible to draw the picture of their happiness, which had continued unin- terrupted from the day of their marriage. Indeed, Lady Louisa was a greater comfort to hinm than ordinary wives were to thcir husbands, in consequence of his ill-health, and an afibcdon of his eyes. She was in the constant habit of reading and writing for him, which he was prevented from doing himself by his bad sight. It is inmpossiblc, from the nature of the thing, to prove every circumstance that takes place in the privacy of life between a mare and his wife; but if hc showed the jury what didpassbetween Sir James and Lady Louisa- if he shlowed them that a fatal attaehmsent sprung up in her mind; that a change consequently took place in their domesdc felicity; tthat all their happiness was thencetorward destroyed; that her temper and demeanour were from that time clanged towards him; then the jurv would fiU up the chasm in the evidence, and say by what that ahanlre had been produced. Had Sir Jamnes at that time been apprised of one-tenth of what would be poved to the jury to-day, le (Air. Brougham) would not say that it would have cDonvinced him to a certainty that any crimnal intercourse bad taken plawce between his lady and the defendant, but it would have carried his suspicions so far as to ascribe that change to an attach- ment between them. From thenceforward Sir James perceived a constant habitual alienation of affection towards him on the Part of lady LouisaL, which rendered him as miserable as he had before ';een happy. In these trying circumstances, he took theonly course that an honourable man could take,_be redoubled his attentions to her, but to no purpose; it produced no alteration in her. =le therefore attrbuted it to some unhappy atEachment; and suspecting that it must be in Paris, he determined to re- move her to some other place, and trv what change of scene would do. Accordingly he took her to Spa, and thence to Brmusels; but no change took place in her manner. He returned for a short time to Paris, but still vithout effecting the desired cheange. He then brought her to Londor;, he tried whlt home would do for her; be took her to her venerable mother's, who was on her sick bed; he thought the restoration of that privacy in which they had formerly been so happy would bring them back their bappitess. All was unavailing. ae then went to his house in cotland and whilst there he heard some reports, and suspicion brok-e upn his mind that an attachment oa the pirt of Ludy Louisa had cmbol died itself into a correspondence with Sir George urray. He communicated his suspicion to her; she received it with indignat7on; and on her knees she disavowed it. He lent this disavowal too easy n ear, ar.d he believed it. Still Lady LIouisa was not able to dis- semble her low spirits, and nothing could restore her to her former cheerfulness. Whiilst. in this state, asa -incident,occrTed which let no doubt upon the mind of Sir Ja-eies that a correspondence had, talcen place between his wife and Sir George Murray. One. morn ing the post-bag was brought into the parlour: Lady Louisa wass readingtso SirkJames, but upon seeing the t-bag she seized it, andopened it. She was turned half round from him; but hc saw her take out a large pS7acket in an envelope, marked from te bearter-Mlaster.General's offlice. Sir George was then in that department. Sit Jam e s immediatelv demanded a sight of that letter; sheruahed outof t.e room with-both the bag and the letter, and at'ter remaining away long enough to destroy the Ietter, slie re tuned with a note and a stiL' letter, and no otler wold- she giv up. It was now self-evident that a correspondence had taken place he bad received " confirmation strong as proof of holy writ" oftha correspondence; the person with whom it wDs carried on was an ill ferior consideraition. His misery was now complete. He %*Ue he an agonized letter; he told her to go to her friends, declp th he mnust leave what he touchinely called his now uiRp home, which he accordingly did. Still rumour was busy it told him that his honour had been given up to anoth Heres, too, he (Mr. BToughan) thought he acted witdy. Sir Geor" Miurray hadbeen hisoldassociate he hail becu hiscomradein th army, and bad known him fromnL his youth. ie was one of-the firs persons upon whom he had flung himselfUin Paris. In no commo oirCumrnStaices he took no common resolution. He asked frorm S George hitusei cxl n eaplanation-he wished to receive it fton uc other mouth;* and f^rom himn, he received?. in repliE a disavOwal so fran and so peremptory that he laid aside all suspiclon. "That I ma not for a moment," said Sir George," lay any ground for suEpicion I take this opportunity of sayingthat in any intercOurse which h taken place hetween Lady Louisa and mNyself, there w nothing in the sUiebtest degree afiecting her honour." - An lie 5ubse9uently iiformed him, through his Ut. ughams .allant friend Sir Robert Wilson, who waited upo hm on th subject, at the request of Sir Jame .'that afttr :PoitiV disavowal of any thing in their correspondence which Si James himself might not have witnessed, if any doubt remained it must be imputed to the bearcr of the message, and not to bha. Alter what had occurred, Sir Jnmes felt he could not lve with hi %vife; but still he couli not believe thatany thingeiialon -he part had passed ; aboye al1 with 3ir George Siuras after such disavowal, rent thsrouk a gallant icer, and la fiend i prive life. That was suficient to Jlul all suspicion. Let tejry n weigh well the situation of the plaintiff--his eallait and h nourable. man, who, frosm -were be once- plect hs a n could not easily withdraw ilem, and from where ia on trusted, could not easily withdrarw his Cinfideienlet tbe picture his feelings at findipg that le had been too longa commencing tX entertain doubts of liais 4ife-hmt he hi be too lone in growing atoicaho her love: left hemrhaitr7 to therlsel thisperesn,ao longy amongst the ha jlestof kinad}au,; Itowandesboiatthe worl% v sexijerornilus honm, hardly; kssoWX whereto-lay. hie heaNd, and boeecrn a object note' eov to +l<a. istnt fhsElw 3orht5 fif y n eshen they shoula1 find that -whifst at Paris a correspondence had been kept up betw;een Lady Louisa and Sir George Mlurray, through the rtumesi of lacqaais and feamies de- chsnt&e; thsat they had fre- g"net interviews, at houises kept for sutch purposes, whiere e'remained togetber- i 'ii pijate, atnd, in sho,t, although they avoidedd aU ll raininp i (notwithstanding that the 1PhIl ifF was so blin thtte ih ave done so with safety,) that it was 'cear tha eryti wchconstituites an intrigue, ex- ePtPerhaps, acta gitte ' vscarried on between theyn? Mt fth 'rank cdianureerved disavowal" (to use his OwniS ords) of Silr Goe lraythy (the jury) would be, as hke (Air Ero~lsa) wa whe he eadit, surprised io lea'n that in twO little mronths afe htdsvwlwsgiven, Sir George AMurray anid Lady Loisa were living togete under the same roof, Sir Geor'ge ini disguie,and Lads' Louis i her own namne. This was suffciet t shw tat hben, if not before, a criminal intercourse had ben finaly copleted. They were living in this way at a watrin..pacein cotlanR, in September, 1819. In June. 1820, we fundthemat latlock, in Derbyshire, under circumstances that admtte ofas itte doulbt of crimninality. In Augustt slhe came to arls.our, narBrompton, where elaievike her. Whilst he wasthere, if er relations caine to see her, hie immedi- eaiiy lft te rom if any of her nephews or nieces were coming, he receve notice and retreated to his bed-roomn, where-he remained in conce_lment until they wen.t away. About Decemnber, she went to he brther Sir C. Paget, who filled the office of -Governor of the Royal M~ilitary Acadtemy at Sandhiurst; Sir George went a little way Wiyth her. She afterwards went to Windsor, and in. M arch shie returned to Earl's-court, where the intercourse with the defenclant Was renewed. Shie next went to Finchley, for a puirpose the jury would sOoar hear-..slte was notlong there when she was delivered of a chlild. Hitherto rhohad had no childreen, and that had beentlhe only want of halpinesssheandlher hus.bantl had e.'perience]. Thiough she ,was atthistiine4years of age,ewing tothie nature of her consti'tutioli1, She ProvedI with child, and wvas derivered at Finchley. The defen- dant now livert with her constantlv and they pijased under the names of Mfr. and Mrs. Evans. Th~ey mainitained their disguise LSuccessfully for some time, and escaped recognition. The chiild was baptized undtr the names " Georgina. Auigusta, Louisa'. Ann, (laughter of George and Augusta Evans." He (Mr. Brouigham) wouald show that all thlis wasq correct, except the names, They wvent fromi Finckilev to Odiham, in Hatmpshire, whzere they remainedi until 18-22. XVhen they quitted Odihiam, it wa,s with theintentioni of effecting t 'purpos.- which was the Ist4t of the aggravations of thlis ease. It appeared, that after the birth of the chifld they thought of' a plan by whichi they might be mar31ried, and live together Openly sad in the face of the world, at the expense of the,character Of this most injured man. If any mneans, they thought, 'could be discovered by which a. divorce might be obtaiinedl, vitliott confessing what had tak-en placei thien the husband's charac- te- alone wouldt be stigmatized 'antI iio staini would be affixed on theirs The .lawv of Scotlane'l, so opposite in mnany respects to ours, seemned ti aFobrd themn a facility for accomplishii,g thiis ob. .iectt BY the Scotch law, if a husband hast not lived with his wife for four years, she inq sue for whiat is cdalled adherence and if he floes not then take her oack, the stilt ends with. a dlivorce, ahid the rarties miilt marry again. The only effect of such a proceed. ,Ing would be to throw a stigma onr Sir Janies's chiaracier ; but wh-at cared they for that ? That was only adding one injuy t th may they had indictedI upon hini before. The' quit - a t r cmefnced: but Sir James adoptedt a couirse that they evienly idnotcaculate upon)-he threw open hais doors to her. Ho ad hi immdiae friends knew whv le had not lived with hter; but he ebhc culdnot know it, and to slho x them that he had niot desrve he, h opned his doors to reeeive lier. When the-y re- ceivd ntic ofthi, they wcre greatly sorprixed. It was then that they eft diha. She set oll for Scotland', aitd weit to Sir James's hous helive wih her for two or three months: but finding that he only 'id this, not for his own di-honour, but to dle- feat her purpose, she left him, and returnedI inito England. There was of course an endi of the suit. Notwithstanding all that had occurred htitherto, it was only throu;h a gentleman whomn he (Alr. Broughiam) wouldi call to-day, thiat'the plaintiff at length rec-eived a communic-ation which hadl the effect at fuilly opening his eyes to the conduct of his wife, andl which left him astounided at discovering what lienever supposed before-that withiout any divorce, shiehail abanidon,edlher honour tothie thefendant. He (Mr. Brough- urn) would not. attem)t to paint his feelingrs onbeing miade acquaint- ed with the comnmission of- ilhat crimne from whiich hiad resultedl the proceedlings whichi ihe jury were this day to dletenninie. They now saw what lie hadl lost, and they wvould hiave to make up their minds stpor the value of 'that loss. They wouild lhear agetmany observations and statemenits from the defendant's cuslwho, lie (Mr. Brougham) suspectedl, would call no evidenc'e. wBut thiey woultd bear the facts in inibid, and it was UPon them, and no~t upon the statement of counsel on either aide, -that they would conic to a dletermination. The defendant coul(i here plead no unruly passions in mitigation pf his conduct. He wvas now 5i3 or ,54 years of age: when this fatal intercourse commenceed, he wvanted only three years of that age; and when die plan was laid for it, he was still old eniough to have avoided it. Ile was a personi highi in the army, like the plaintiff, and well knew that the station which they both held in society was calculated to deepen the woundI which he had inflicted upon the feelings of the latter. For the injury he had received at his hiar'ds to his happiness and his clharacter, the plaintiff now sought for reparation ; and rhe jury would rem-ember thiat thie humasbard who had been in- juresd by the seduction of lia wvife, was still further injuredI if lie re- ceived not ample compensation for that seduction. Elizabeth Laflin (as we heard the niame) was then calledI and ex- amined by Mlr. PAIn s.-I am housekeeper to Lord G wydyr. I livedl in the service of Sir James and Lady Erskine for ten years. I wats lady"' maid to her. I had been previously in LordGalloway's service. La!dy Galloway was sister to Lady Lou~isa Erskine. Sir James and ady Louisa were married in 1801. I saw them together before thiat. I sw them go to be married. During the ten, Years that I was in their service their conduct was most exemplary. They, were particularly and mutually attaclied. I think they had been at- tached to each other for two years before they were married. I always rscoled in England. I wvas not in Scotland with Lord and Lady Galloway. I lived with Sir James and Lady Louisa until they wn t to F'rance, which was shon after the battle. of' Vaterloo. Tbeiirwdlni~ent continued unabatesitothe timeof their-leavinmg Eg-, land. It was more than an ordinar-y attachment. I had no means of' maigsm rosrations before their matriage. They lived at Cotg-os,na ariuhain, duiring his illness. Lady Louisa rensie hrewt i in seclusion. She was very attentive to himn, anti used to read to him. I did not live with them after their return fromn France. Cross-examined-by the ATTORawEy.GEN;EsiLA._1 do not know what age she was when she was married. I am not certain that she was 40 when she went to the Conitinent. She was 24 when slie was married, I should -think. By a Juror-.- do not mean to say that Sir James was so blind that he could not read the direction on a letter. She read for himn more like an affectionate whir', who wished to amuse him. Colonel M'Donald sworn.-..I know Sir James Erskine. I have known him since 1803. I was on his staff for thiree years,-first in Ire- land aboult 1804 but at that time-I did not know him. I was at-. tached to hiis staff as Mlajor of Brigade. He is a L,ieutenanit-Gene- ral. Sir G. Mlurray is a Lieutenant-General in the ordnance: se- cetid to the Duake of Wellington. He is member of Parlia- ment for Perthshire. After I knew him in Ireland, I used to dine with himn, and be ia consqtant intercourselwith himn both offi- cially and privately. I lived next4door. I1had constantoppottunity of seeing Lady Louisa with him. I can only say th.ey seemied to live niare happily than any I have ever seen. Their attachment was genera~lly esteemed snore than ordinary. It was the subject of ob- servation. I was for the besit part of a year attached to his staff. I was afterwards in Scotland, just before the service in the Peninsula coimmencett. I left Scotland with him, ,went to Spain withbhinsi,and returned to England with him. When I afterwards saw them, Lady Louita and he seemed to live on the samne terms as theyvdid in Ireland. I sometimes spent ten days or a fortnight together writh them in the house. Afier 1810, I saw them for a very short time before they' went to Paris. It was in the sumnsner of tIme battle of Waterloo. They were at an hotel either in Clifford -street or Bond-.street. They did not seem to live on the same terms as fosmerly. I saw very llttle of them then. it was only for ore day. By a JUTor.-They seemed to me to be more distant towards each other ; perhaps I was impressed by reports that I had heard' to that effect. Jamies Mloray examined.-I am brother-in-law to Sir James Era- kine. ly estate is atAberkernie.I lwas not much acquainted with Sir James before his marriage; but afterwards I was in the same reient with hiim, and had frequent opportunity of' seeing him and Lad Luisa togct'eer. They seemied most affectionate on both aie.I should say their attachment was carried to perfect romance. I sawv no abatement down to the battle of Waterloo. I had not muchi opportunity of seeing them at Paris, but from thfe little I had, their attatchment did not seem so great then as before. Cross-ex-amined by the ATToHNEY-GENERAL....Sir James, Erskine's sister lived with them at a place called Torray. In the spring of 1816 Sir James went to Spa. He went first to Cambray. The alied armies had quitted Paris before he went to Cambray. I-le then went to Spa. I do not know that Sir James and his lady had separate beds; at Spa; I heard so, but not fromi Sir James hitnsell'. I do nor know that they had separate suites af apartments there, as- sociating only at mneals. I cannot bring it to my recollection. I -rasherTthink they had. I remnember Sir James leaving Torray and going.to Edinburgh; he left Liady Erskine behindI him. They were in the habit of v-isiting Sir George Mlurray at Paris. On their return to Paris from Spa. was not tere. I do7not knowv that they visited Sir George after their return to Paris. Alass Erskine's resi- dence was principally with mne. Sir Robert Wilson, examined by Mr. BsOUGHASn.-I havebeen intimate with Sir James and( Lady Louisa Erskine. I have been livig i thesam hase wth hemsomie months after tkeir marrage tht wsinordertords huse'. Tlieirattachment was the lones pasioat atacmet ate marige ver saw. It was the subectofobsrvtio. Iocasinaly awthem after I had known themat ord ertord', ad itseeedto continue. AdamCrafor swrn..I ws bed p in the Erskine family. I ,was in Sir Win. Erstne' service before the plaintiff's. I was in Sir James's service from 1813 to the end of 1816, first, as groom anid then as house-servant. I never saw two so loving to one arother as they were before they went to Paris. I went with them in 181l5. I stayed there about nine months. From thience we wen-t So ea and to Bru'tssels. I stayed at Spa about three montlhs. 1qsiitted his service it Brussels, because he said he was go-mg back to Paris- I was afraid something unpleasant would take place. I wiut afraid of Lady Erskine and Sir George Murray. I had seen something betweeu them not very proper. They stopped at the Hotel d'lrciand. There was a correspondence kept up at Paris between Sir George and Latdy Louisa. It was carried on through a lecqZai de place named Augimate. Letters were given to Lady Louisa by rfemz7w-de-c'tlo bre. I remember one day in par- ticular in the winter time, Sir Janes was oat about pictares. I saw Sir George at the house. It was t let him in. I was sent out for some asparagus. If that was tle season for asparagus, I could not find any. (A laugh.) I was about an hourawav. Onh mny return I found Sir George still there. I had a pantry of the dining room. When Sir George was going awvay he had her by the hand, but see- ing me he drew her int'w a back place out ol' rny view, and they vventi out by another door. If she was reluctant tf go with him, she was lausghing. (Laughiter.) I went to Spa with Sir James; we were stopped on the road to Spa by lacqiuey, with a letter to Lady I ouisa. It was given to the nm-idL did not see the address. I know of letters having been us into the post_office at Brussels, directed to Sir George in Lady Louissfs hand-writing. I saw tl em in the nmaid's hand, I saw her bring back letters in Sir George Al urray's band-writing. I qui;ted the service of the plaintiff at Brussels. I e7rs afraid to informn the h!aintiff of r4hat I saw, because I knew his temper too well, and is love for her, and I feared lie would hAve taken a pistol ane; shot Mresxamintd by the ATTonmy-GENERAL.-WVlien they went out bBarsisther door they saw use. I had no particular reason for not- wshmiig to 3? back to Paris. I know Aliss Augustine, L:,ds LOitMdA' maid. I was on as- good terms with her as any e I did notkIrnow that6she had'achild.. l was'not fcaid e? sneetfng thzatlilh Child. I never htal it said that I vas the fil,ther of that child. I was afraidto tell Sir James what I ad szeats, for I believe fie would have ahot me. I once said to Sir Jamies, when sitting beside himi on the dlickey, that I thought he would be bettleratbhomethian here. lHedid not seem tosuspect whatlime-ant, H~ only salid he could not livekethome as well as here. I was afraid to go, on, I thought in my own n'rind, from the love he bore that woman, he would shoot mne on the spot. There were pistols on the diekcy, and hlunderbusses too. Miss Erskine-is here to-.dav. Shle went with' us to Spa. WVe went bv Cambrav. The head-.quafters of the allied army had bcen removed from Paris -to Cambray, I be- lieve, three mnonths before. I left Sir Jaynes at Binssels. RA-examined by Mir. BROuGHAm.-Sir James did not take uP mny hint on the dicktey in thec lighit I meant, and I did not carry it farthier. By a Juror.-Thie reason whiy 1 suppose .Sir George and Lady Louisa went out by a back door whien they sate inc in sigRht, was, because he did not like m~e to see that he tooik-her by the arm, and that they were laughiing at each other. JaGeorge Shrinier examiinedi through the meAdium of an inter- preter.-I wvas iocqnai-de..plaoe?e tSirJarnesErskine in Paris in 1815. Iwen't with the carriage whien Lady Louisa drove out in it. There was a place whiere shc 'used to go regularly eve!ry day. I Il!nowg whomn -shemnet there. 1Isaw him there, but not every time. It was Ge- neral Mlurray. LiadyLouisa usedgenerallyto go there atone o'clock. and stop until dinner time between 4 antil 5. I remnember once Sirt Jayne.s Erskine called while Liady Louisa was there, and was obliged to wait a quarter of an hiour in the ante-chiamber. On that day I did, not see any lbody, hut heard a noise of Joors opening and shutting, and different persons runninLg backwards and forwards before Sir Jame-s was permnitted to 'enter. 1 saw no person leave thie house with her. Shie was always alone, excp,pt whern Ge- nieral Erskine's sister was with hier. I did not see any othier Person leave the house about the same time. I did not see GeneralAMurrav quit the ho)use, beca,use was at tliefronttloor, and hewent through the garleni. I knew Sir George AMurray's servant Augutste. Ilie used to go out with his master wvhen hie wvent visiting. I saw himr there very otften. Augu~sta used to come witls messages to Gleneral Erakine. Every time he came lie used to bring a letter-someti'nes in the miorning, sometimes at m-id.day, and sometimes in the even- ing. He gave the letters to Lady Louisa'sfe7nrnncde-chaembre : she usedl to give himn tileanswers, and sometimtes Lady Louisa gave them herself. The lady sometimes gave verbal answvers to Auguste. All that time Auigusta was servant to General Mlurray. Cross-examined by Mr. SCARLETT.-Trhere were othier persons visitwd at this house where Lady Louisa used to visit, but I did net kcnow thiem. When nobody else was in thie eardrir.e, it v/aitedi for hier in the Court. AMiss Erskine livedI with Lady Louisa, and. visited at the same houise with her Ladyship. It was situatedl in the Ruie dl'Aujoni St. Honore. ' Jean 13aptiste Cologne swvorn..I was servant in the house in the Ru l'Aujo StHonore. I have seen Lady Louisa Erskine at that hiouse; and General Mlurraty altO. I hare~ see:l thcm risrer very often. [speak ofl1115. They came one after anot!ker. Thieyivent inside the house. I have seen themn togethier thiere, but not alone. Thiey uised to be in the sao/on ; if any other person seas there, they would- sometimes v.o into a hedroomn. General Erskine came there one dla ', andi occasioned a great mnovemient. (A laughi.l A numb.1er Of persons going in and out, and great confusion. I dlid not see -,-hat because of General Murray and Lady liouisa. Thiey went in through :he ante-chamaber ; they dlid not return the same wvay. I did not see General Mlurrav and General Erskine togethier there thiat day. There was a dilTerenit way of getting out through the gardlen. I re- member General llurray boreaking h'is leg. lHe visited there all thle time he was ill, Ile usedl to be wlseeled into the gardlen. Lady Louisa uised to comie to the hsouse throughi tie front door. Sise us6d to go there often. Cross-examined by Mlr. Craoss.-A great many othier persons of quzality, all foreigners, visited there. The usisal time of visiting was4 the wrhole of thec day. TVhere was a garden of 10 acres attachedI to it. By a Jntror.-People used to go to thiat bed-room of whiceh I hiaye spoken as tn a salon. By M'Vr. B3inucstrAs,r.Other people used to visit at the house, but I did not observe the samie s.'uvenzens as whien L-Ady Louisa was there,. (Laughter.) Miss Erskhne exainainedl...I. am sister to Si&r James Erqkine. T hiad frequent opportuitniies of seeing thie terms upon which lie andi Lady Louisa lived. I accompaniedl them- to PaTi-, in 11115. Previoulyg to tlhat, I always thioighit themn extremnely attached. After they had been somse time-at Paris, I didi not thiink they were uipon the footing theyhad eenon bfore 1 ometmesobservedl irritation between them Ths~otintedirhle e wre broatd. WhIen they went to the ounry di notgo iththe. [ad a brothier Jolsn. Ilie had Cros..xaine...i~e entto ars aou Juy,1815. Before we went to S ic h allied army had remo d hirhu-quarters to Cambray. We ade Cambray our wa t Sa.W stopped otle day at Cambray, anid dinedi withi Sr GogMuray. WVe hiad sometimres dined withIhim atParis. Si an. n Ladyv Louisa ha,,d different apairtments at Spa. 'We stopped at Spaamonthtl or two). WVe then went to Brussels. The head-quarters were then at Brus- sels. I did not see the Duke of Wellingrton thiere. We went back to Cambray. I dlo not recollect if Sir George was then thiere. We afterwartis returned to Paris, and stopped there from January to the beginning of March. WVe saw a good dleal of Sir George duaring that time. I'Vedined withliim frequently. Ido not know whethier Sir James and Lady Louisa slept together at that time. They alay occupied the same apartment except whien in Spa, and that was because the room-s were too smnall far two beds. In the roomi they occupied at Brussels there was but one bedl. T remneniber their going down to Torray, in Scotland. They occupiedl different apart- m-ents atTorray. I do not know, one way or the other,vhetiher they slept together after they left Spa. After he left Torray; Sir Janie's wrent to EdinbUTrgh; from that he~ went to liondlon, aznd back again to Scotland, and then to the continent. He did sot again reside withi Lady Louisa. In No~emnber, 1818, he lef't Torray. Lady Louisa left Trorrav for some time, and on her return I visited hier. By the ~Tury.-Sir Jamnes went to the Peninsula in 1809. 1 re- sided with Lady Louisa during hiis absence. Mlrs. Anderson, sworn.-I was cook and housekeeper at Torray. [ went there in 1817. 1 was engaged in London. Sir James quittedl Torray suddenly in Novem-ber, 1818. 1Iremnemberone dayecarrying sh. 1s.tc.r. bag i to h. rom L auls l.ubia said, ." Lay it down; Sir James sai'd, " Give it to me ;"' and took it. He a;ked for the key; Ladly Louisa v/ant to fetcls it; and 1 went away. Mlrs. Cut- tar, Lady Louisa's maid is dlead. Cxoss-examined by MYr. SCAmtLM`sT-They occupied separate bed-rooms. I remained there about a year and half. Lady Louisa went to Londlon. I afterwards sawi Sir Jamnes in Edinburgh. Sir Robert lVilson, re-called by Alr. BaLouG11Ao.U...I hiave seen Sir George Mvurray wtite. I believe that letter to be Iiis hiand- writing. This is my own. In consequence of a request of Sir James Erskine, T had an interview with Sir George Mlurray. The subject of my cortrmunicotion with Sir George was relating to a correspondence anu posed to have toaken place between Sir Gbeorge And Lady Louisa. Sir Georgedenied that hr hadl had aclandestinecor- respondence with her. The term "c l.-nTdestinP' havingbean introduced by Sir James, prevented a satisfactory explanation from being given to him. Sir George did not dleny thlat there hadl been a cor- respondence, but distavowed anythingeclande-stine in it. Hesaid his explanation would be"1 a most frank, cantdid, anid unreservedI dis- avowal." Sic Robert here read his own letter. It was addressed to Sir James, stating the substance of -his interview with Sir George, and recomendng te sbjec to e buiedin oblivion. The ltterfrom ~r Gorge,to w ich r. Broug'k atm referred in his penng,wasels red. I siteitht nthig liad occurred inju- riou to ir Jmes' honur, nd ws daed Aril 11, 1819. Sir obet Wisonconinue.-Sr Jmes was at an hotel in Lon- donthe. H delaed imslf atifid with Sir George's explana.. tin Sir George was always a mnan of the highest honour. I hiad no te sli ghtest doubt of the troth of that disavowal, nor hiave I now Sir James cold me, when he first applied ta me, that he hiad no suspicion of actual guil.t, mand it was theref'ore alone I interfered. By Mr. BROuGumA-f.-Sir James Erskine is also inidisputably a iman of the highest honour. Jane Rob.-ily mothier kept a lodging.house at Dumblain. It is a watering place in Scotlanid. I recollect Lady Louisa coming there in June, 1819. She took apartments for hersplf andI a frienil whomn she expected. That friend came about a month after her. Sir George Mlurray, as pointed out to me afterwardis, was that pers9on. His name was tI hen concealed. They lived togethier about teni (lays or a fortnigist.. They were much togetl!er ; walked, dined, and lived tog ether. Bsy a Juror.-l mean they ate andI drank together, but nothing more that I knowi. They hanl seoarate apartments on the samec floor. Hersarvant slept on, the same floor : she is since dead. She called her friend SI'r. Thing.o-me. They livedI together. We are vary par- ticular as to whom we take into our house. Isashela Eadly.-I remember Lady Louisa Ereikine coming to Mirs. Rob's house about five years ago. After she was there a moiuth, a gentleman came. Ilie walked out with 'her, and dined withi her, he slept on thie s.sme floer. Slits Cutler rlways madle the bed, and Ilas. aisted her at the back of the bed. I was to wait at table for MIrs.Rob, but Lady Louisa did not waist me,as she had her own miaid. I never could eatch the "1 friend's" name;- he was alvpy called Lady Louisa's friend. Mlrs. Cotler said'he was a Mlr. T7h3ing9-o.mye. (A Pete;~r Stirling...-! was- servant to Mrs. Rob in 1819. 1 remember a gentleinan cominig there in that sumnmer. I doni't know whio lie is. It isthe same that the las%twitnes allude(ito. He and lady Louisa used to walk together. I saw tlhem one dlay walking together to. war(is a quarry;, I followed, and saw them sitting on the brow of the quarry. I did not think it hionourable to look after themi any far- tuier. [ didI not see whether they went into the quatryor not, but they wvere sitting in tite most convenienit place to go in. It. was a highplaa,frm wich heycoul se toa considcrabkU distance withi out ein sen. oftn sw tem alkng together in the park wher tim qurry s. he qarr is ellkniown to the onild lairds abot ter, bt ot o te resntgenr:tion. (Laughter.) I had som supicon f tem an threfre idnot look after toem any J. Duincan swore that ha pointed ouit Sir G. Mlurray to the wit- nesses Eady and Rob, and they said it teas the same person who was with Lady liouisa at Mrs. Rob's house. MVary Brailsford.-.I was at Mlatlock in Aprtil, 1820, in a boarding.. house there. I recollected Ladly Louisa Erskine coming there, and Sir George Mlurray shortly afterwards. I waited on Lady Louisaa. They dined togethier. Sir George stopped as long as shedid. They did not dine in rise public roomi. Nobody dined with them. I waited on them at dinner. I afterwvards came to her in London. I foundl her at Aladdox-street, and v/ant with her the same eveninig to Earl's-eourt, Brompton. Tlher- a oeey ihhri h Bsrom pton. Sir Gao. Murray lived with her tlere. Thley slept on the same floor, the doors opposite each other, not far apart. When company were invited, Sir George seldom made his appearance. Whoen say of her ladyship's family, came there, I used to see Sir Gcorge's rooitm-door locked; and I had seen Isim ifs it a short tiune befbre. I recollect her going to Sir B. Paget's house at Sandburst. Sir George overtook her on the road, and went part of the way with her. Susan Creswell.-I lived servant at E:nl's-coart, wheaI Lady Louisa was there. I saw Sir Geo. Murray eatinig and drinking anct sleeping there. I saw aqentleman caull tliere, and when I went up stairs with s tray I saw Sir Geo. AMurray hid up stairs. This was last Macrit two years. I did not particularly observe Lady Louisa's C arlottc Hastings.-I was at Finchley in lIarch, 1822, in the service ofSir George and Lady Louisa. They passed under the name of Evans. Shie was confined there, and had a daughter. Sl mother nursed the child. They went from Fineliley to Alurrell. green. The ATyORNEY-GENE5tAL admitted that the chuild was btOn in April, [822, and baptisedac described b Sir. Brotghaasm, rn Mr. lonepnusy writer to the irignet in 6&tlandl, proved Ithe pro. ceessgisrths SctchCourts, instituted byLadyLauisas fora divorce. A.~a1Le~Tthi kid,he said,'is first promoted thr adherence, and if' thalieoe raned,a divor'ce a tvniszcl*s mefriiwnii takes place. izerslicannot l ommenoe until four years after the husband's de. sectioni. The divoca wife, would have* the samne rights in every respect issif her husadhad been naturally dead. If, upon being servedi With a citation the husband recives lher backc. there Ls an enld to, the 8suit. These proceedings are still Pending in'consequence of a point of law lhaving been raised.t Cross.examninedl.The summons is dated 10th December, 1822. Mir. Moray examined.-4 mnade a comirhunication to Sir James about thte end of January, 1823. It affected bhim to such a tlegree, that I re-gretted I S'as thie person 'Who had mnade the urnfortunrate com.. muicTlation. He Struck himself on the head inia frantjc.msnner. Crossi-examijned.-I don't thiink Sir Jamies's mind is noreesl Mr. lloepenv,recaled alo soketo thte eflect proaluced upon theplantff' feligs y te nteligncofLadyLouttsa's Jishonour. The A'rOarxy-3a,rxAL adresed thie jury for thle defend- ant. H appeared, he said, as counsel for Sir George Mturray in this,most distressing case-distressing not ontly to Sir J,amies, but to liady Louisa, anda to every person connectedi with them : but he could niot help thinkins, that a little le-is of iryitability, and a little more of caution, woutd havemsved them from Those &sils whiich they nowv all dlep'ored. The gentlmiran whom he (the Attorney-General) retesed,was adm itted. by- his learned friend, aind by atll the wit- ne6seeS, to be a man of the highest character in societv, He was be-. loved by his frienda, and exalted in his profession. He began life with a Small patrimonial income, which he hiad increaed but little, notwitlistanding h~is promotion in the armyy. Indeed, nearly the whole of his income wvas derived from htis military appoint.. ments; his estate in Perthshire, amounting to 4001. a-year, being barely sufficient to qualify him to enjoy a seat in Parliament. Ilec admitted that Sir James Ersakine was also hiighly respect- able, and even that he and Lady liouisa had for siome years lived happily togethier; but whlen his learned friend dcscribed the plaintiffand dlefendant as oldI friends, he Stated that whichi was not.I founded in fazt. They hadt been merfely companions in arms foir a short time; therefore, when his learned friend wvould lead them (the jury) to suppose that old friendshiips had been trampled upon, and tieshad been broken, hie was doing that which was not w;Lrrantedlin trutli. For the first time. aftera previous Rhort and sliglitacquainitance they met in Paria in 1815. The jirry had it in evidence fromi Coloniel ill'Denal-I that there was an aite-atiollisn Siir James andi Lady Liouisa's ma-nner, andi that reports hiail beeni in circutlation befor'e they went to Paris. WVhen they arrived there a new life broke upon themn. Thie jury miao.t eatsily seppose,- that whien the accomplishied wife of a Geyitral Officer, whio hadi distinguished I)imself iinder the Duike of WVellington, made her apperw ance in that city, she wats im- mnediately receivedI into all that spirited society and vorluptuous inter- cour:,e th,.t theni existed in Paris. They would perceive from the evi- dence, that theirritation of Sir.James did not artse'frdtn anlysuspicion of Sir Geo. Mnurrav,butproceeded fromn snmeoener cause unconnected with hint. I-e aLdmittedi that an intercourse took place between Sir. Geoige andI Lady Louisa Erskine; it was impossible that the po- lishied manners of his gallatnt clienit (lidl not niake an iimpression on the accomplishied i,iinid of Lady Erskine; or that her high accons- plishnmenit- and informnation shlould not produce a Similar ellVect upon the mnind of S3ir George. He,admiited that thiey were on thec best possible termns, andt that is cor~espondeAce diilake place between themn. But this was not maAe nmatter of charge by Sir Jimes; hie didl not conno1lain that a correattondence had taken plare, but that a chinde.91ine correespondence hiad beet: carried an with his wife, Ile (rite Attorncy-General) was miore anxious aboutonepartoftliccase tita anoher he as mat olicitous to show that nothingciia occurredchen otherwise the severest wvound would beifited on the hionour o i gallant client. It was admitted by his learnied frieiid M r. Bro gam,that even at this momnent it was matter of doubt that any criminalI iniercouirse hatd titan taken place. And whiat were thec one or two liinsy factst stafed inL evidence ? The first was, that one day Sir- George to-k Lstdy- Louisa by the hand, andl they wvere going ouLt ofon ed(oor, wheny sceing a servantt there, iltcy went out at anothler. [le was confident thejury wrould draw no tinfairinference f'om such a trifling occurret,ce as thiat. But then they ac re asked tLo draw a simnilar inferettce fromithie scenes that took place in the house ofaniost res4pectable ladly. They must not supopose, because lila learned friend had sup!ires'med this lamly's name, that her house wvas not of the most respectabl- descrip ion; hidhad mnerely do-ne So from an unwilling- itegs to have hier name mixedi up in any, way with a business of this nature. Whien T;ady Louisa visited at that house, she was accomn- paniedl by Aliss Erskio'c and SIr Jamnes; atid it was also in evidlence, that the f?ady was visited by all the respectable foreigners in Paris. It was said, however, that on one occasiony Sir James was rnot admnited ; but neither of time witnesses haa said that Sir George was tlsere upon that occatsion anjd how did she go to this house 'Awy in her carriage, wichiel mvieshe at thiedoor for her, except when t was1.1 wanted to go somewhtere else. But ttiten it was said, that letters wvere broughit, and answvers returned to them 1y Lady' Louisa. How were the aniswers returned? X Vhy, by word of mnouth to the lacquat- de-place whio brought the letters. 'Elese we-re the propositions from which the jury were to draw a conclusion injurious to the character and lhonou r of thec defendant, Bunt what was the evidlence oni the othier side? That longc after this, a communicati on was made through Str Robert Wilson, in which Sir George declared on his honour as a gentleman, thiat nothiing-derogatory to Sir .JanicasErakine hiad taken place between him and Lady Louisia, and Sir Robert W..ilsomt this dav declared, after hearing the evidence to which he had alluded, he believed, thiat up to thie period whien that disavowal was given, nothing criminal had* tukcen place. Now, let thcmn lolt at whiat did take place. In the spring of the year 1816, the allied aroties left Paris. Up to that time Sir James and hiis lady were in the habit o1' associating and dining with Sir George, which would not have been the casielhad any Ssupiciotn existed towards thie defendant. The irritation of Sir Jamnes's mind, therefore, mast have referredI to Lady Louisa, unconnected with Sir George. At Spa it ex- isted to such a degree that they hiad Senarate apartments ; he (tlie Attorney-Gets%ral) knew that Mlist Erskinte gave a different colourinig to this ; but it might be that Sir Jamnes gave his sister this excuse to prevent any conyversation taking place respectittg it. Now if aniy irritation existed in Sir James's mind. when they were at Spa, it was clear tisat it was not against Sir George that it was directed ;for on their rett,rn to Paris the samq intercourse with him took place as before. It was clear, thetefDre, that up to the timne of their co.Aling to England nothifng crimninal ott $r George's part was even suspected ; aud it wvas only aftcrwaids, wvhen tite a4lections of the parties were altogethier alienated from eCads other, and wlten they were livii -s quite sepa~rate,that, that unfortunate intercoturse took, place wh1ich, lia. led to.. thiss ei. ~ aineiwas fifty Years of age, the iaAy ukpiaids of fort ; a-Ad when she went to Paris it was psible a niew feelingc might'have arisen, and led to that alienaitio.n of aff'ectiou of which they were now comrplaining ad which alienation the irritation of Sir Jamnes's own mnind might haave increased to such a degree as led to a separation, and ultimately to that calamity wlitich they were now all lamenting. It appeared thiat dluring tite fourteen years that they reside-d at Torray, after their retain fromn France, and while Sir George was still in that country, that irritation continued, and they had separate bed- roomns. His learnedl friend I lad said that, in consequence. of a letter received at Tot'.ay, Sir James's suspiciyoits were ex- cited ; but no evidence had beerts given of thiat fact. After cite explanation receive(I from Sir Gcorge subsequently, Sir James said lie was satisfied ; and still lie didl not live with Lady Louisa in the ordinary wvay ofimama and wife ; tlaerefore it was plain that Sir George was not the cause of his distrust of her ; and whbat 'lid lie to, notwithistanding that Satisfactory explanation ? He left her at Torray, and went to reside at Edinburgh. Being tltus de- serted, her brother Sir B. Paget came' for lier, and took her to her friends in the south of England. It was after this titat the recol- lection of the little cou-rtesies and attemitions whiclishe andl Sir George tiad imiterchangedl at Paris warmed into feelings of a softer nature. Under such circumstances, then, what damages ought his client to pay ? A lady, owving to some cause that coul, not he ex- Planined having produced emibittered feelings, is deserted by haer hus- band; a genttmnan comes to England, atid finds her in ithat situa- tion, aind then that unhiappy consequence follows which was not denied. He (the Attorney 'General) would ask, was there ever a case, so far as hisgaliant client was concerned, less aggravated in its circurmstance.s? A wife deserted by her husband, first partially, they sleeping in separate beds but in the same room ; then furtlher, thiey sleeping in ditl'erent apartm-ents; then entirel'y, hie abandoning his house, and thieit his country : the defendant arrivinig fromi the con- tinent, and falling a victim to those feelings which sometimes the best of us canxom conquer l With thesecob-servations he would leave thecas wth hejur, stifie i coldnot be in better hands. He woul noloner scuy thir ime exeptto make an obsgervation on heconluingtoic f is'eanedfren. What had Sir George to o wth he uitin cotand Bu supose he liad. At tltat tim.e it ws amited hatan duleros itercourse had taken place ; it occurre to Ld Louisa, the daugliter of a noble family-Ikoo.wirng that if Sir Jae ever instituted such aaproceeding as this ewould onlydo so as astep tp*wards procuring adiverce, and not for the purpos,eof obraningm~oney)-tlhatif adevorceewasteobeprocured, it wvould he better for all parties to proceed on a nony-sdlierenceein Scotland, instead of by action for cri'minal cotiversati6r, in Eng- land, by wvhich every private tact andI expression that hiad taken place- would be discissed, anti, throtigli t te medium of the public press, circulated to every part of the empire. But Sir James, for fear of appearing to have been guilty of any thing harsh towards Itis wif'e, said, "True, I have deserted you for four years; but I am ready to receive you again, and then to piroceed in the English courts!l" But something, perhaps, was due to the tender- ness of Lady Louisa. She was anxtoua, perhaps, with thie-advice of her friends, to obtain adivorce withiout the painful disclosures wihich have now taken, place. Tuie learned copaisel cotneluded by, oncemore stating, that he cheerfully confided the ecm to tise jury; whiat he was most anxious for was, that his gallant client, an officer who had Served under Sir John Mlore, the Duike of Wellington, and othier illuistrious Generals, svith distinguAished credit, and a mahi of the hig eset honour, shouild not be supposed to have sullied thiat lionour by a false disavowial, and that no titan woulId go out of court that dlay without believing, that at the rime of his interview with Sir Robert Wilsoni, no intercours derogat~ory to Sir James Erskine had taken place bstween his lady and Sir George Murray. No evidence was offered on behalf of the defendanit. 51 r. Fitecwnrra,, the Under-Shieriff, very briefly charged thejstry. Thiey understoodl,he said, thienature ot theseactiotis, and would con- sider on thie one hand whether there tvere any circumstance of extenuation in the case ; sald on the other, whether the def'enilant was the sole cause of theseparation between thepolaintifl'and his wife. The Jury dleliberated for about a qtuarter of ait hour, and returned a verdict for the plaintiff-Damages 2,5001. The Court was crowvded during the trial, prinuipally by distin- guished military officers. SECONDARIES' OFFICE, RED LiOAJ-SQUARE. JITLY 23% eRlflU -n LTEUTENANT-GENERAL SIR JAXES ERSKINE, BAIVT., V. LIEU- TENANT-GEWEUAL Sli GEORGE .MURhAY.