Difference between revisions of ".NTMyMw.MzY2OTg"

From Georgian Papers Programme Transcription Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 101: Line 101:
 
he suffered so vile a topic of defence to have passed his lips. But,
 
he suffered so vile a topic of defence to have passed his lips. But,
 
ere you condemn, let him have the benefit of the excuse, if the
 
ere you condemn, let him have the benefit of the excuse, if the
excuse be true.
+
excuse be true. You must have observed how his Counsel [[unclear]]
 +
and vibrated--between what they called connivance and injudicious
 +
confidence, and how, in affecting to distinguish, they
 +
have confounded them both together. If the plaintiff has conninved,
 +
I freely say to you, do not reward the wretch who has prostituted
 +
his wife, and surrendered his own honour--do not compensate
 +
the pander of his own shame, and the willing instrument
 +
of his own infamy.

Revision as of 10:45, 26 April 2022

underline Mr. CURRAN's SPEECH. /underline

[Every reader of taste, we are confident, will be highly gratified by the following abstract of the Speech of Mr. CURAN, to evidence, in the late Crim. Con. Trial in Ireland, MASSEY v. the Marquis of HEADPORT.]

Never so clearly as in the present instance have I observed that safeguard of justice, which Providence has placed in the nature of man. Such is the imperious dominion with which truth and reason wave their sceptre over the human intellect. that no solicitation, however artful, no talent, however commanding, can reduce it from its allegiance. In proportion to the humility of our submission to its rule, do we rise into some saint emulation of that ineffable and presiding Divinity, whose characteristic attribute it is to be coerced and bound by the inexorable laws of its own nature, so as to be all-wise and all-just from necessity rather than election. You have seen it in the Learned Advocate who has preceded me, most peculiarly and strikingly illustrated. You have seen even his great talents, perhaps the first in any country, languishing under a cause too weak to carry him, and too heavy to be carried by him. He was forced to dismiss his natural candour and sincerity, and having no merits in his case, to take refuge in the dignity of his own manner, the resources of his own ingenuity, from the overwhelming difficulties with which he was surrounded. The Learned Counsel has told you that this unfortunate woman is not to be estimated at forty thousand pounds --fatal and unquestionable is the truth of this assertion. Alas! Gentlemen, she is no longer worth any thing; faded, fallen, degraded, and disgraced, she is worth less than nothing! But it is for the honour, the hope, the expectation, the tenderness, and the comforts that have been blasted by the Defendant, and have fled for ever, that you are to remunerate the plaintiff by the punishment of the defendant. It is not her present value which you are to weigh--but it is her value at that time when she sat basking in a husband's love, with the blessing of Heaven on her head, and its purity in her heart; when she sat amongst her family, and administered the morality of the parental board; estimate that past value--compare it with its present deplorable diminution-- and it may lead you to form some judgment of the severity of the injury, and the extent of the compensation. --The Learned Counsel has referred you to other cases, and other countries, for instances of moderate verdicts. I can refer you to some authentic instances of just ones. In the next county, 15,000|. against a subaltern officer. In Travers and McCarthy, 5000|. against a servant. In Tighe against Jones, 10,000|. against a man not worth a shilling. What then ought to be the rule, where rank, and power, and wealth, and station, have combined to render the example of his crime more dangerous--to make his guilt more odious--to make the injury to the plaintiff more grievous, because more conspicuous? I affect no levelling familiarity, when I speak to persons in the higher ranks of society--distinctions of orders are necessary, and I always feel disposed to treat them with respect--but when it is my duty to speak of the crimes by which they are degraded, I am not so fastidious as to shrink from their contact, when to touch them is essential to their dissection. However, therefore, I should feel on any other occasion, a disposition to speak of the noble defendant with the respect due to his station, and perhaps to his qualities, of which he may have many, to redeem him from the odium of this transaction, I cannot so indulge myself here. I cannot betray my client, to avoid the pain of doing my duty. I cannot forget that in this actin the condition, the conduct, and circumstances of the party, are justly and peculiarly the objects of your consideration. Who then are the parties? The plaintiff, young, amiable, of family and education. Of the generous disinterestedness of his heart, you can form an opinion even from the evidence of the defendant, that he declined an alliance which would have added to his fortune and consideration, and which he rejected for an unportioned union with his present wife. She too at that time young, beautiful, and accomplished; and feeling her affection for her husband increase, in proportion as she remembered the ardour of his love, and the sincerity of his sacrifice. Look now to the defendant! --Can you behold him without shame and indignation? With what feelings can you regard a rank that he has so tarnished, and a patent that he has so worse than cancelled? --High in the army--high in the state--the hereditary counsellor of the King --of wealth incalculable:--and to this last I advert with an indignant and contemptuous satisfaction, because, as the only instrument of his guilt and shame, it will be the means of his punishment, and the source of compensation for his guilt.-- His Learned Counsel contend that the plaintiff has been the author of his own suffering, and ought to receive no compensation for the ill consequences of his own conduct. In what part of the evidence do you find any foundation for that assertion? He indulged her, it seems, in dress--generous and attached, he probably indulged her in that point beyond his means; and the defendant now impudently calls on you to find an excuse for the adulterer in the fondness and liberality of the husband. But you have been told that the husband connived. Odious and impudent aggravation of injury--to add calumny to insult, and outrage to dishonour! From whom but a man hacknied in the paths of shame and vice--from whom but a man having no compunctions in his own breast to restrain him, could you expect such brutal disregard for the feelings of others? --from whom but the cold- blooded seducer--from what but from the exhausted mind, the habitual community with shame--from what but the habitual contempt of virtue and of man, could you have expected the arrogance, the barbarity, and folly of so soul, because so false an imputation? He should have reflected, and have blushed, before he suffered so vile a topic of defence to have passed his lips. But, ere you condemn, let him have the benefit of the excuse, if the excuse be true. You must have observed how his Counsel unclear and vibrated--between what they called connivance and injudicious confidence, and how, in affecting to distinguish, they have confounded them both together. If the plaintiff has conninved, I freely say to you, do not reward the wretch who has prostituted his wife, and surrendered his own honour--do not compensate the pander of his own shame, and the willing instrument of his own infamy.