« PreviousContinue »
consciousness of his own inte he trusted never would be found grity, did not suspect a contrary in it again. He also made some principle to prevail in him. After strong allusions to the ungrateful the acquaintance between them part which the witness Thompson was matured, he married his had taken against him in this daughter, upon whom he settled conspiracy. Finally, he protested a jointure of 10,000). He after his innocence of the crime of wards lent Giblett sums of mo which he now stood charged, and ney announting to 17,0001. and trusted that the sentence of the further sums, which raised the Court would at once rescue him whole of what Giblett had suc. from the infamous plot which had ceeded in drawing from him to been laid against him, and restore more than 30,000l. In fact, he him to the arms of a beloved and had not only deprived him (Capt. only partner. Harrower) of all the money he Mr. Baron Richards summed could by possibility extract, but up the evidence at considerable he had robbed his own daughter length. He observed, that it was of the 10,0001. which had been of little consequence by whoin or settled upon her. Every means by what means the prosecution was used by Giblett to cause his was instituted. The jury, as well wife to leave him, and live at as himself, were assembled there home with himself, when he of- upon their oaths, and however fered to give up certain apart- painful the duty would be, should ments in his house for her ac- they determine upon the guilt of commodation ; adding, “ that the prisoner, still that verdict they would be able to get the must be pronounced. The simwhole of the money to themselves, ple question, therefore, for them and he" (Captain Harrower) to try was, first, Had the prisoner
might go and starve." These been proved, to their satisfaction, proposals, however, were always according to the evidence of Mr. uniformly and indignantly refused Burrowes, and the confirmatory by his wife. He alluded to the confession of that fact to the witcommission of bankruptcy which ness Thompson, to have been had been issued against Giblett, married to Mary Usher of Bomby which he had contrived to de. bay? And, in considering the latfraud him of his money, and men ter part of this question, was the tioned a circumstance which that witness Thompson to be believed ? person had been heard to declare, Next, was the marriage of the namely, “ that he would try and prisoner to Miss Giblett, during get the money into Chancery, if the lifetime of the before-menother designs failed of depriving tioned Mary Usher, also satishiin of the property.” He went factorily proved ? Upon these into a variety of other statements, points he had no doubt they would the object of which was to repre come to a safe and conscientious sent Giblett to be a character of conclusion. the worst description, a cha The Jury, having retired for racter such as he never thought half an hour, returned with a existed in England, and such as verdict of-Guilty; but recon.
mended, the prisoner, in the therefore prayed the judgment of strongest manner, to mercy. the Court on the defendarit.
Mr. Baron Richards assured Sir John Nicholl expressed them, in warm terms, that the himself fully satisfied with the recommendation should not fail sufficiency of the evidence to susto be attended to.
tain the prosecution; and he, The Court throughout the therefore, pronounced the marwhole day was crowded to excess. riage null and void under the
Mrs. Giblett, who remained in canon law, condenined the defencourt during the trial, was con dant in costs, and enjoined him veyed out, in an almost helpless the usual penance. state, after the Jury had retired Some observations were then to consider the verdict.
made as to the terms of the pe
nance, and reference was in conArches-Court, Doctors' Com- sequence had to the cases of Cleamnons.- The Office of the Judge ver v. Ride, and Cleaver v. Ride, promoted by Blackmore and Thorp otherwise Wooldridge, which were .v. Brider — This was a criminal similar proceedings, in 1790; proceeding promoted ex officio by from which it appeared that the Messrs. Blackmore and Thorp, penance performed in those cases church wardens of the parish of was to this effect :- The offending Harting, Sussex, against Mr. parties stood in white sheets at William Brider, an inhabitant of the porch of the church during that parish, for incest. The suit the ringing of the last bell for was instituted by letters of re divine service on a Sunday, and quest from the diocese of Chi- until after the first lesson, asking chester, and the charge upon forgiveness of all persons enterwhich it was founded was the ing the church; they were then marriage of the defendant with led into the church, and placed in Mary Walton, the daughter of his a conspicuous situation near the deceased wife by Thomas Walton, minister, where they remained her former husband.
until the gospel of the day was The evidence in support of the said, when they repeated a subprosecution consi-ted of copies of missive acknowledgment of harthe ifferert registers necessary ing been guilty of the crime imto show the marriage complained puted tự them, inplored the forof, and the relationship of the giveness of God, promising not parties duly authenticated by pa- to offend again, and entreated the role testimony; and their coha- congregation to join with them in bitation was likewise fully spoken saying the Lord's prayer, which to by several witnesses.
was accordingly done. No appearance was given, nor Sir John Nicholl expressed defence offered, by the defendant. himself satisfied of this penance
Sir Christopher Robinson and having been adopted after due Dr. Swabey, for the prosecu reference to precedents; and he, tion, shortly adverted to the therefore, lelt himself bound in effect of the evidence, and sub- the same manner to enjoin it in mitted that it fully established the the present case. accusation preferred, and they A similar proceeding was then
hearıl against the wife of the last his steward and some farmers, defendant, in which the evidence swore that, independently of the being precisely to the same effect, house which, though desirable to Sir John Nicholl pronounced the a gentleman, would only be an same sentence in all respects. encumbrance to a farmer, the
land would not let for more than Lady Brisco v. Sir Wastel Brisco, 250l. per annum. The rest of bart. This was a question as Sir Wastel Brisco's property was to the aliinony to be allowed to evidenced principally by his own Lady Brisco during the depen- answers. It appeared to be near dence of a suit instituted by her 3,0001. per annum, and Lady against her husband, Sir Wastel Brisco had. 2001. per annum pinBrisco, for a divorce on a charge money. It appeared, however, of adultery.
that during the dependence of the The suit was commenced to suit, demands had been made and wards the close of the year 1813. áctions brought against Sir WasThe usual statement of the hus tel Brisco for debts of her ladyband's property, technically called ship's contracting for plate, linen, an allegation of faculties, was a carriage, horses, &c. to the given in, as the first step in the amount of 1,400l, or 1,5001. bealimony question, in Hilary Term, sides a sum of 2001. which had 1814. Sir Wastel Brisco gave in been paid to her on account of his answers not long afterwards, alimony. Afhdavits on both sides, to which some objections were with several letters annexed, were taken ; one of which, the want of given in explanation of these a sufficient specification of the items; but the letters were revalue of a house and domain he jected by the Court as inadmissihad in the country, was held suffi ble. The principal purport of the cient, and fuller answers were admissible explanation was, that decreed. The further answers Lady Brisco had been obliged to were given in Michaelmas Term incur mary of these debts in confollowing; and Sir Wastel then sequence of Sir Wastel having estimated in them the net value burnt clothes of hers to the value of the house and domain in ques- of above 2001. Sir Wastel, on tion at 350l. per annum. Lady the contrary, denied that they Brisco, on the cont; ary, estimated were worth more than 10l., and them at 2,0001. per annum, and said, that he burnt them to inproduced two witnesses who cor duce her to procure some other roborated this opinion. It ap- clothes from the place where she peared, however, on their cross had left them. Lady Briscu also examination, that they were in stated, that the carriage was orhostility to Sir Wastel Brisco, dered on her father's account, but were engaged in lawsuits against he had died before it was comhim, and had indicted his steward pleted, and offered to deliver up for perjury; but the grand jury to her husband a piano-forte, some had thrown out the bill. The plate, and other articles, for which witnesses, on the other hand, the debts were incurred. produced by Sir Wastel Brisco, Considerable discussion took
place between the counselon gested, whether it was not com. both sides upon the details of the petent to the Court to condemn property, and the proportion to her in the costs of so unusual a be allotted to Lady Brisco. proceeding
Dr. Arnold and Dr. Jenner, Sir William Scott remarked, for Lady Brisco, argued in sup- that the suit was originally for port of her claims to a provision, adultery against Sir Wastel Brisduring the dependence of the suit, co, but it had now assumed the upon a liberal scale, suited to her shape of recrimination against rank and station in society, and the lady. The allegation of faendeavoured to vindicate her con culties in these cases ought always duct in contracting the debts in to be given, and the question of dispute.
alimony disposed of in an early Dr. Phillimore and Dr. Lush- stage of the proceeding, to preington argued at some length vent the husband being unnecesupon the extravagance of Lady sarily harassed with suits and deBrisco with respect to these debts, mands for his wife's debts. He and the diminution of Sir Wastel then stated the progress of the Brisco's income, owing to the proceedings in the present inpresent depreciation of landed stance, and remarked, that though property, and the heavy expenses it was usual to acquiesce in the to which he had been exposed; answers, particularly when refrom whence they inferred that formed by order of the Court, yet Lady Brisco, with her pin-money, it was undoubtedly open to the and what she had received from wife to examine witnesses, if she Sir Wastel Brisco, having no en- thought proper : this, however, cumbrances, was richer than he
was a right not to be exercised was with a larger property, fet- wantonly, but with great caution tered as it was with such constant and tenderness. It was never and heavy demands with the necessary to enter into an inquimaintenance also of his children, sitorial scrutiny of the husband's and with the obligation of sup- property; but it must be taken porting a dignity and appearance upon a fair estimate. Here, howsuitable to his station in life. He ever, Lady Brisco charged the was, however, anxious to have value of a particular property at the question of alimony, pending 2,0001. per annum, which Sir the suit, settled, his common Watsel set at 350l. per annum : law counsel advised him that, un so great a difference as this intil it was, he would be constantly duced the Court to go into the exposed to the debts Lady Brisco inquiry, upon the result of which, so lavishly incurred; but, under it now turned out that Lady Bristhe circumstances, they trusted co's valuation was enormous and that the measure of the allowance unfounded in the extreme; and would be very small; and as Lady that even Sir Wastel's was above Brisco had taken upon her to the real value. This was a misprove what she had so palpably representation which the Court failed in, with respect to his pro must consider had been imposed perty, the learned gentleman sug- upon Lady Brisco, as it was un
willing to suppose that she de- hoped never to see such another signed such an imposition upon instance; and, as a country genthe Court; and by what witnesses tleman, living in his own county, was it supported ?-by two only, he had to support the dignity kept who were in open hostility to Sir up by his ancestors, and had also Wastel Brisco-persecuting him to maintain his children. These with lawsuits, and indicting his would have been considerations steward for perjury, but pre- to have influenced the Court, had vented by the grand jury indig. there been no misconduct on the nantly rejecting the bill. The part of Lady Brisco; but she had testimony of such witnesses was launched out into expenditures of a piece with the allegation to an enormous amount: there upon which they were examined, were orders for plate, linen, and was utterly undeserving of china, horses, a carriage, &c. and credit. Taking the whole of Sir all without a justification, or any Wastel's income upon the fairest communication with the unfortu. calculation warranted by the nate husband, who was to pay for proof, the learned judge consi. them. It had been said, that this dered it to be 2,6001. per annum, was done to replace the clothes subject, however, to an immense burnt by Sir Wastel, and this Sir depreciation from the present Wastel accounts for ; but it was state of landed property, which certainly a most unfortunate ex. was notoriously decreased in va- pedient. The carriage, too, if lue, some farms being let at rents ordered on the authority of her reduced 25 per cent. others pay- father, she should have taken care ing no rent at all, and others that he was responsible for; but thrown up altogether. It had the bill was sent to Sir Wastel, been said that all this might be and it did not appear that the fatemporary; so might the conti. ther's executors had ever been nuance of the present suit; but applied to on the subject. It was the one appeared, at present, as true, it was now said that Lady improbable as the other. Sup. Brisco was ready to give up the posing every thing had been clear articles in her own possession, in the case, the Court would have but this was but a secondary satisbeen disposed to allow one-fifth faction if made, and there was of the whole property to Lady nothing to prevent her converting Brisco, including her pin-money. them into money for herself, if This would be quite as much as she thought proper. Under all was necessary for her suitable these circumstances, where enormaintenance in a situation call. mous expenses were thrown upon ing, as hers did, for retirement the husband in every mode to and prudence, and in which she which female extravagance could would be expected to have some apply itself, if the Court did not little regard for the interests of feel that, by ordering alimony, it her husband and family. He had was most consulting the protecto maintain the expenses of the tion of the husband, it would suit, which had been carried to hardly be disposed to allow any an extent of which the Court alimony at all. Under all consi