{"character_count": 2391, "word_count": 412, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9890000224113464], "ccnet_perplexity": [2170.10009765625], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
Interesting h7al for Seducton.-The Western Ex. amlner, published at New Alexandria, Ohio, gives us the following particulars of highly exciting tri. al which took place on the 18th and 2Gth of Octo- per, Tn that town. The plaintiff is a ournevman banter, named George Blanchard, and the defend ant MT. Samuel Carnworth, tavern keeper, posses sed ot considerable property. It appeared in evi- dence, that nme months ago, the defendant seduced and carried away Mrs. Blanchard from her husbands dwelling in Columbia, who took with her a great portion ot her husbands household property, and he had not since, until about the first of September last

 been able to trace out the place of their retreat m

 medlately on the elopement of his wife, MT. Banch- ard sold otf his property in Columbia and removed to Cleaveland, where he was employed as tourney man painter, until he accidentally learnt of her re-

 treat; he having previously supposed that she had gone to the East. On the receipt of this intelli- gence, Blanchard repaired to New Alexandria. and entered the house of the defendant where he found hls own Wne, and also part of his household prop erty, which he commenced removing. While doing so the defendant came home and beat him in the most unmercltul manner, and, what was worse than all, hls palntlHs wife encouraged him defendant during the affray, and said she hoped he would give hlm sound thrashing. When in court the plain tlff bore on hs countenance evident marks of se- were punlshment.] The facts of the elopement be- ing proved, the certificate of marriage between Mr.

 and Mrs. Blanchard was brought in evidence and admitted. For the defence it was shown that Mr.

 and Mrs. B. never lived happily together, and that the elopement was altogether voluntary and without persuasion on the part of Carnworth who had mere

 y taken Mrs. B., as boarder, at her own request

 to protect her from a brutal husband. With regard to the assault it was alleged that Blanchard was in the act of destroying Carnsworth's own property when, in defence of it, he had inflicted the injury on Mr. B. The jury, however could not decide that Mrs. Blanchard had remained in the tavern only as a boarder though there was no positive proof that she had lived with Carnworth as though he were her husband. They accordingly gave the plaintiff s5OO damages. It is said that Carnwoth IS perfect