Extraordinary trial! Norton v. Viscount Melbourne, for crim[inal] con[versation] ... A full and accruate report ... / by an eminent reporter ... Embellished with a portrait and memoir of the Hon. Mrs. Norton. &c., &c.

  • Norton, George Chappele, 1800-1875
Date:
[1836?]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Extraordinary trial! Norton v. Viscount Melbourne, for crim[inal] con[versation] ... A full and accruate report ... / by an eminent reporter ... Embellished with a portrait and memoir of the Hon. Mrs. Norton. &c., &c. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    13/38 (page 11)
    If the periods of Mr* Norton’s absence. Lord Melbourne professed to be the friend of Mr Norton. He came into the house as his patron, and Mr. Norton felt towards him nothing but friendship. Lord Melbourne dined in the house several times, and professed to be on terms of intimacy ; but I find that Lord Melbourne was a constant visitor at the house at times when Mr. Norton was not there. He began by coming to the house shortly after the duties of the Home Office were (I suppose) discharghed—about 3 o’clock He was in the habit of leaving before Mr. Norton returned, and I think that any gentleman, on looking at the evidence I am going to state must be satisfied that very shortly after their first interview a criminal intercourse commenced, and was continued between the defendant and the wife of the plaintiff. Of course in all cases of this sort it rarely or never happens that you can prove the actual commission of the offence. In this case, as in all other cases of crime, for crime it is, you must convict the parties on circumstan¬ tial evidence, which would lead any unprejudiced mind to infer a guilty conclusion. I was telling you, gentlemen, that Lord M. was a constant visitor at Mr, Norton’s when Mr Norton was not there. In what way did he visit ? The first thing that strikes me is this. ] do not know whether it may be important in the result, but, 1 confess it appears to me rather extraordinary. The house of Mr Norton opens into Bird-cage-walk—that is the public en¬ trance. There is another in a small court behind. Whenever vis¬ itors entered the house they came by the entrance of Storey’s-gate. that was the way by which visitors entered, and it is the one pat- ticu’arly which a person coming from the Home Office wrould very naturally enter. Lord Melbourne always went by the gate that opened from behind. When Lord Melbourne came to the house Mrs Norton gave orders to the servants that no one else should be admitted, and no one else was then admitted. These orders wepe fhen acted upon. The servants were directed not to admit the most intimate friends, even their relations, whilst Lord Melbourne was there. The servants were directed not to come into the room unless they were rung for, and they obeyed generally. The blinds which looked into the Park were drawn down whi'e Lord Melbourne was there. He was in the habit of leaving shortly before Mr Norton came home. From Mrs Norton’s conduct you, gentlemen, must infer whit else took p^ce. She goes to her room; prepares herself to receive Lord Melbourne; dresses, arranges her hair, and gets the room ready before he comes. While he was in the house she fre¬ quently goes into her bed-room whilst he was there. Her hair is disordered, her dress is disordered, she goes again to her bedroom to set it t0 l ights. Having arranged«her hair she comes down again to Lord Melbourne. But the case is not confined to her house alone;