The authority of a father

RIDGWAY. - At a petty session held this day, the right hon. sir E. Thornton, K.G.B., late minister at Lisbon, appeared to answer the complaint of his son, for unlawfully and cruelly beating and assaulting him. Lady Thornton was likewise summoned to answer the same charge, but, being prevented from attending by indisposition, it was arranged that the case should proceed as if she were present.

The complainant, a lad about fifteen, stated, that, on the 30th of September last, having been ordered by his mother (lady Thornton) to sweep the carpet, and clean the grate of her dressing-room, he proceeded to do so, when, about three quarters of an hour afterwards, her ladyship came into the room, and, finding the work not done, took him by the ears with both her hands, and shook him, and pushed his head against the window shutter, which made his ears bleed and his face swell. She then left the room, and locked him in. About ten minutes after, his father came, and said, "So you do not choose to finish the room," whereupon he took him by the hair with his left hand, and struck him five or six times with his right, thereby causing his face to swell. The complainant further stated the menial offices he was compelled to fulfill, which, although he considered them degrading, he never refused to execute.

Richard Callaway, servant to J. Harris, Esq., deposed to the appearance of the lad when he first went to his master's house to complain.

The Counsel for Sir E. Thornton contended that this was an inquisitorial interference on the part of the magistrates, who had no right to question the authority of a father as to the correction of his son; and that the charge of assault could not be substantiated against his clients, than whom more fond and tender parents did not exist.

Sir George Magrath, M.D., and Mr. Seacombe, surgeon, were called to prove the affection, kindness, and sympathy, displayed by sir Edward and lady Thornton towards their children upon all occasions when professional attendance had given them opportunities of witnessing their maternal and paternal conduct.

It further came out in the evidence, that sir Edward and lady Thornton had forcibly held their daughter's feet in hot water, regardless of her screams, and that they invariably employed the complainant and his brother in the culinary and household departments.

The magistrates, after having retired for a few minutes, declared it their unanimous opinion, “that Lady Thornton be convicted in the penalty of 5l., and sir E. Thornton in the mitigated penalty of 1l., including costs."