The Sun. — London, England, 1858-11-27 00:00:00

LAW INTEL LIGENCE.-B Cw. 26. COURT FOR J iiVORCE AND MATRINIO 7tAL CAUSES. (Before Lord Chic S Justice Cockburn, Mr. Justice Wightma n, and Sir C. Cresswell.) CURTIS V. CURTIS. In this case th e Judge-Ordinary, after a trial, which occupied seN - eral days, had pronounced a rk. cree of judicial separation, on the prayer of Ylrs. Curtis, upon the g round of cruelty. Mr. Curtis, the :respondent, now applied in per son for directions as to the mode of prosecuting an appeal from that decree. The Court said that notice of appeal having been served on the other side, the case would be set down for trial in the us ual manner. The evidence would not be reheard, b ut would be taken from the notes of the learned ju dge. The appellant would have to establish that ahe evidence did not warrant the decree. Mr. Forsyth, Q.C., for Mrs. Curtis, applied for directions as to c osts. The Chief Just ice said no order could at preF d e n t be made upon t} tat point. PEARCE V. PEARCE. Dr. Phillimore Q.C., on the part of Mr A , P e arce, the petitioner, applied for an order allo- x i ng h er an annual sum by way of permanent s!,imony-. The Court had pronounced a degree, - apon the wife's petition, dissolving the marreage on the grounds of adultery and desertion. The respondent derived an income of £.500 a-yeas from his profession. He was a barrister,,.-and liF„d been enabled to complete his education lay: his wife's money. She had about £4O a-year of er own. The Lord Chief Justice—Let the husband put £llO to tha i z, and make up her income to £l5O. ROB iNsoN V. ROBINSON AND LANE. Mr. Montagu Chambers, Q.C., Dr. Addams, Q.C., an .d Mr. Karslake were counsel for the peti tioner, Nr..r. Robinson ; Mr. Bovill, Q.C., Dr. Phil lin -ore, Q.C., for the respondent, Mrs. Robinson ; an d Nr-r. Forsyth, Q.C., and Mr. Coleridge for the .)-respondent, Dr. Lane. .As several months have passed since this case was last brought before the Court, it is necessary to state briefly the circumstances out of which it -arose. The petitioner, Mr. Robinson, is a civil en gineer, and in Feb., 1844, married a widow, Mrs. Dansey, the respondent. She had an income of £4OO or £5OO a year, which was settled upon her. Among other places at which they , resided after their marriage was Edinburgh, and there, in 1850, 'they became acquainted with the co-respondent Mr. Lane. In 1854 Mr. and Mrs. Robinson took up their • residence at Reading, and renewed their acquaint ance with Mr. Lane, who was then at the head of a hydropathic establishment at Moor-park, near Farn ham. His wife and her mother resided there with him. In 1857 Mr. Robinson, during an illness of his wife, unexpectedly discovered three or four manu script volumes in her handwriting, purporting to be a journal kept by her for a period of four or five years. The entries in that journal appeared to him conclusive evidence that his wife had been guilty of adultery with Dr. Lane on various occasions in the autumn of 1854, and he instituted a suit in the ec clesiastical court, and obtained a divorce a mensa et thora. He afterwards presented this petition for a dissolution of the marriage. Having already pub lished the extracts from the journal upon which the petitioner chiefly relied, it is sufficient to say that, if true, they were strong evidence of the charges in the petition. The defence set up on behalf of the respondent and co-respondent was that the state ments in the journal, although they might have a slight foundation in fact, were substantially false ; that Mrs. Robinson was labouring under a peculiar disease, which caused her to imagine events which never occurred ; and that the entries relied upon were made under the influence of that disease. The case was opened on 14th June last, and continued on the two following days. At the close of the case for the petitioner an application was made to dis miss Dr. Lane from the suit, as there was no evi dence against him, and to allow him to be examined on behalf of Mrs. Robinson. On June 21st the Court, after taking tine to consider, held that he could not be so dismissed, and that his evidence could not be received, contrary, however, to the opinion of one of its members—Mr. Justice Wightman. The learned counsel on either side then summed up the evidence, and the Court reserved its decision. At the next sitting, on the 3d of July, the Lord Chief Justice intimated that some members of the Court, including himself, entertained serious doubts as to the propriety of their decision excluding Dr. Lane from examination, and that the case would be ad journed in order to allow time for the passing of an act of Parliament which would set those doubts at rest. The following clause was accordingly inserted in the Divorce Act of last session (20th and 21st of Victoria, cap. 85, sec. 11) : " In all cases now pending or hereafter to be commenced, in which on the petition of a husband for a divorce the alleged adulterer is a made a co-respondent, or in which on the petition of a wife the person with whom the husband is alleged to have committed adultery is made a respondent, it shall be lawful for the Court, after the close of the evidence on the part of the petitioner, to direct such co-respondent or respondent to be dismissed from the suit, if it shall think there is not sufficient evidence against him or her." Mr. Forsyth now prayed that Dr. Lane be dis missed from the suit with costs. The Lord Chief Justice said the Court thought there was no case upon the evidence against Dr. Lane, and were quite prepared to dismiss him from the suit. They could not at present deal with the question of costs. Dr. Phillimore then moved that Dr. Lane might be examined on behalf of Mrs. Robinson. The Court assented, and Dr. E. W. Lane was then sworn, and examined by Mr. Bovill. He said—l am a physician. I married a daughter of the late Sir Wm. Drysdale, in 1847. After my marriage I first resided at Edin burgh, and afterwards at Moor-park. Lady Drys dale, my mother-in-law, always lived with me. In the autumn of 1850 I first became acquainted with Mr. and Mrs. Robinson, in Edinburgh. The two families became on intimate terms. I have four children. The last was born on the 7th Oct., 1855. My wife is about 31 years of age. The Robinsons left Edinburgh about June, 1851, and were absent the rest of that summer. They returned in the autumn, and went away in the following May or June. Mrs. Robinson was a lady of considerable literary attainments, and corresponded with lite rary men. Our acquaintance was renewed at Moor park, when they were living at Reading. In 1853, when my wife and I went to the Continent, we left our children with the Robinsons for four or five weeks. They also stayed with them on other occa sions. Mrs. Robinson showed them a great deal of kindness. I went to Moor-park in March, 18.54. I took a hydropathic establishment, which is fre quented by ladies and gentlemen for the benefit of the treatment. In the July of that year Mrs. Ro. binson first visited Moor-park. She came to stay for the first time in Sept., 1854. She remained for two or three days. She again came in the following Oct. She arrived on the 7th and left on the 10th. Immediately afterwards the Robinsons went to' • France, and did not return till June, 1855. She came on the 21st June to Moor-park, and re mained until the sth July. She again came on the 10th Oct., and remained until the 15th. In Sep tember, 1856, she came over for a day and a night. She was always an invalid. She consulted me professionall y in June, 1855. She inf o rm e d me that she had been labouring under a disease pecu. liar to women for several years, and that she' suffered from continual headaches and great depres sion of spirits. Her age seemed to between 45 and • 50. Between 40 and 50 a change takes place in the constitution of women. The disease from which Mrs, Robinson was suffering affects the nervous system. She was a mixture of calmness and excite ment. She was exceedingly staid in her demeanour but was sometimes flighty in her conversation. I did not prescribe for her, but merely gave; her ad vice, and told her she ought to follow a course of tonic treatment. She never consulted me except on that occasion. I was in the habit of walking about daily with the different ladies and gentlemen in my establishment. The grounds are extensive and beautiful. All the walks are open to the patients, and to the servants and to visitors. The neighbours who are friends also have access to them. One part of the ground is a thoroughfare between Farnham and Swift's -cottage. When Mrs. Robinson was at Moor-park, as she was a very old friend, I was more attentive to her than to strangers. I walked about the grounds occasionally people, with her, and occa sionally with oth er a h m not aware that I with walked more with h er than others I walked with pretty nearly all o f th em in succession. When any of the ladies did not appear at breakfast I was in the habit of visiting them in their rooms. I may have gone into Mrs. Robinson's room. The Chief Justice—But I understood she was there not as a patient but as a friend. Witness—lf I had known that Mrs. R o bi nson was unwell I might have gone into her room, but I don't remember that I ever did go. I cannot swear that I never did, bnt I have no recollection of having done it. She generally had tw o rooms—a sitting room and a bedroom, one leading out of the other. I received a fee from Mr. Robin son for my professional advice to his wife. He sent me a check after her visit of June, 1855. My study is a room to which all the visitors and patients had access when they wished to see me. Friends con tinually came in and sat with me. It was my pri vate room, and any one who wanted to communi cate with me came to it. Mr. Bovill—ln the whole course of your at quaintaneewitb. Mrs. Robinson, from first to last, had you ever any criminal connexion with her ? Never. Mr. Bovill- —Did you ever take any liberties with her per-don ?—I never did. I ‘ ll '. toward', h you ever conduct yourself in nr the i smallestnanyinde degree.l7cateor improper manner? 3 1r.'Bovill— Did you ever address to her any conversation or observation of an amorous descrip tion P—l never did. In October, 1855, she arrived with one of her servants, and she was received in the hall by my mother-in-law and myself, in the presence of a number of other persons. The hall is also a billiard-room. On that occasion I gave her a kiss. I will tell you why. In the September pre vious my wife and I were anxious that our children should go to the seaside for change of air, but we were too busy to absent ourselves, and Mrs. Ro binson kindly volunteered to accompany them. She did so, and on her return to Moor-park I saluted her us I have stated. Except on that occa sion I have never kissed her. I never put my arm round hrer waist, or embraced her, or tempted or caressed her. I never did anything to excite her pas aons in any way. I never had any conversa i tkon with her about obviating consequences. There I was no understanding between us to her using ini tials. I have seen the statements in the diaries. They are utterly and absolutely false—a tissue of romance from beginning to end, as far as they implicate me in anything improper. She never cut a lock of my hair off. I may have walked with her on a summer's evening, but in the month of October I never walked with her after tea-time, seven o'clock. The dinner hour was half-past one. Walking in the park at all hours was part of the general system of treating the patients. I never, except on the occasion I have mentioned, offered to kiss her. The scene in the fly, described in the journal, is utterly false. Of all the walks about the establishment the bower walk is the most open. The bower itself is commanded by two public roads and two lodges. There are three doors to my study. One is from the public dining-room, and another is opposite the pantry door. The servants occasionally use it as a passage room, but they would not come through if they knew I was sitting , there. Cross-examined by Mr. Karslake, in the absence of Mr. Chambers—The servants would generally knock before entering. There is a summer house on what is called the island, but it is really a shrub bery or wilderness. Persons sitting in it are not visible at some distance from it. The bower walk is on the island. There is a bower on the island proper, but it is in ruins and has never been used. I have very likely bcenin the summer house on the so-called island with Mrs. Robinson. I have been there with nearly every one in the house. The bower walk is also on the so-called island. There are extensive moorlands of fern and heath at some distance from the house. The grounds and shrub beries beyond it extend for a couple of miles. The intimacy between my family and the Robinsons sprang up rapidly. We saw them nearly daily. We could hardly be more intimate as friends. Mrs. Robinson and I frequently talked together on scien tific subjects, on books, on phrenology, and other topics. I wrote her letters when she was absent from Edinburgh ; sometimes long letters. I very often communicated to her matters of interest in my family. In 1853, on returning from the continent, my wife, and Lady Drysdale and I stayed a day and a night at Reading with them. I wrote to Mrs. Robinson when I was abroad. It was in June, 1855, 1 had the conversation with her about her being unwell. Some of her children were with her. I only had one strictly professional conversation with her. She was never under treatment in my establish ment. She was there about a fortnight, and that was the longest visit she ever paid. Her husband had previously requested me to speak to her about her health. The fee which he sent me was 10 guineas. It was partly for my advice and partly as remuneration for the visit. I once presented Mrs. Robinson with a locket, as a gift from my wife, containing the children's hair. She and my wife had exchanged lockets. That was at Edinburgh. My wife made her presents of that sort on one or two occasions. Mrs. Robinson did not generally occupy the same room. I never remember having been in her room in a morning. I have been in her room in an evening. It was early one evening in 1855. I might have dropped into her room in the evening on more than one occasion, but I can't re collect having doze so. On that occasion I met Mr. Thom there. It was her sitting-room, not her bedroom. I was never in her bedroom at any time in the evening. I don't remember ever having been in her bedroom in a morning. I only visited pa tients in their bedrooms when they were too un well to come down to breakfast. The date of Mrs. Robinson's visit in 1856 was August or September. I may have corresponded with her after that visit. I last saw her in Dec., 1856. 1- take in the news papers at my establishment. I did not know for certain until July, 1857, that a suit was going on in the Ecclesiastical Court against Mrs. Robinson. I heard of it from my gardener. I saw a report of some proceedings in the November of that year. It was about two lines, I believe, in the Times, stating that a divorce had been obtained. I had no corn. munication with Mrs. Robinson or with anybody about her in 1857. My gardener, John Birming ham, told me his sister had been up as a witness. My attention has been called to the diary since the commencement of these proceedings. Re-examined—The report I saw was in the Times of 4th Dec., 1857. It merely stated that the suit was promoted by Mr. Robinson against Mrs. Robin - son by reason of adultery ; that Dr. Addams was about to open the case for the husband, when the Admiralty advocate, for the wife, said he would effer no opposition, and that th e ourt pronounced sentence of divorce. To the Chief Justice—l was not communicated with on behalf of Mrs. Robinson when that suit was commenced. When the suit was instituted in this court I was not sought in any way by her. Mr. Bovill said Dr. Lane could not have been examined in the suit in the Ecclesiastical Court. The Chief Justice—He could have been examined ex proprio mottr, but if the wife had chosen to re sist the suit she might have made him a witness. Dr. Lane then withdrew, and Mr. Bovill addressed the Court on behalf of Mrs. Robinson. Dr. Lane had now been acquitted of the charge of adultery, and, notwithstanding that acquittal, it must be contended on the other side that Mr. Robinson was entitled to a divorce on the ground of his wife's adultery was Dr. Lane. The Court might not think that an impossibility, but it would certainly he an extraordinary result. Sir C. Cresswell—That is merely a technical matter. The Chief Justice—The wife might not resist the decree. It might then be pronounced, although the anomaly you point out would still exist. Mr. Bovill said he thought the case for the peti tioner might now be taken to stand entirely upon the entries in the diary. The attempt to adduce evidence independent of those entries had entirely failed. One witness alone (Warren) had given evi dence in support of them, but his testimony had been entirely discredited. With regard to the diary, he would first observe that it contained no explicit statement of Mrs. Robinson's guilt. Some of the most eminent men in the kingdom had proved that the disease under which she was labouring was likely to excite her imagination, and cause her to imagine what had never taken place. The fact that she had suffered under that disease for several years was also proved, and the means taken by her and her husband to effect a certain purpose tended to aggravate that disease. It was manifest,...froat page to page of the diary, that she was under the influence of painful feelings with regard to her husband. As early as March 14, 1852, she wrote : " Sat down to muse. It was a gray. gloomy evening ; the city, dimly visible, lay below us—spires, monuments, streets, the port of Leith, the Frith, an d i n th e f ront ground small, unventilated dwellings, and houses of ten stories high. 'Oh,' thought I, each of these roofs conceals human life with all its mysterious joys and sorrows, Doubtless many a so journer in these dwellings has a private history, thrilling, exciting, strange. If I them some of them might make me feel less sad, less lonely. There may be hearts as much discontented with their lots as mine : few, I think, more Weary of life.' Then I refle c t e d on my future, what I should do to live with my uncongenial partner —an unedu cated, narrow-minded, harsh -tempered, selfish, proud mortal. No answer came to my speculations. I walked home with my boys. At heart I love and value them, and were it not that my darling Otway would b e t a k en f rom me I would leave my husband for ever. Home at half-past five ; played psalms, wrote Journal, read, smoked cigar; boys with me till near nine. Felt rather less sad." Passages of this description occurred throughout the journal. As early as November, 1850, she wrote : " Sat on beach and meditated on my past life,—my errors of youth, my provocations to my brothers and my sisters, my headstrong conduct to my governess, my dis obedience and want of duty to my parents, my want of steady principle in life, the mode of my marriage and my conduct during that marriage, my partial and often violent conduct to my children, my giddy behaviour as a widow, my second marriage and all that had followed it ; impatience under trials, wandering affections, want of self-denial and resolute persistence in well-doing ; as a parent, as a daughter, as a sister, as a wife, as a pupil, as a friend, as a mistress. There was no point to which I could turn for consolation. 1 could only wish and strive to amend and repeat Burn's words,— " ' Thou know'st that thou has made me " " With passions w ild an d s t rong ; And listening to their witching voice Has often led me wrong." Their Lordships would remark that she frequently appeared to be struck with Shelley-'s writings, and it was natural to infer that she had also been struck with events in Shelley's life, and with the fact that he had imagined things which never existed. They would also observe that she sometimes addressed herself to a reader, as if her confessions, like those of Rousseau, were intended for the perusal of some one after her death. She wrote on one occasion Reader, you see my inmost soul, You must not de- THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER 27, 1858. spice and hate me. Do. you also pause to pity ? No ;- for when you read these pages all will be over with one who was too flexible for virtue—too virtuous to make a proud, suc cessful villain. Good night. May you be more happy I" In February, 1852, she wrote : "All makes me feel how short my time is here, and com bines to make me irresolute and miserable ; self-reproach comes in, and yet I know not how I can make myself any wise different. My heart clings to those that cannot help me, and rejects those whom I ought to love. God help me! How useless and hapless is my life ; how much am I dis contented with myself, and yet I persist in evil. Youth is well nigh gone ; I shudder at old age, which I must face !" And again : "It is, however, doubtless an effort to emancipate our selves from the self-love, which not only reigns dominant in youth, but is also encouraged by the adulation and the efforts of those about us, and to become the reasonable, moderate, self-possessed beings that we aught to be. To me, with ardent feelings, with love of approbation beyond the common, with an ill-balanced mind, and the early mis fortune of a bad education, this is unusually difficult. God and my fellow-men judge me mercifully! Rested after writing in journal till dusk." The learned counsel also read some of the passages relating to Mr. Thom, and contended that they con tained almost as strong proof of criminality as those relating to Dr. Lane. The Chief Justice observed that it was hardly fair to Mr. Thom to say that he was referred to in the same terms as Dr. Lane. Mr. BOVILL submitted that the accounts of the interviews with Mr. Thom were so much exag gerated that they might be regarded as purely imaginative. The entries with regard to Dr. Lane and Mr. Thom were of the same description—they were not records of fact, but expressions of feeling. On the 30th of May, 1852, there was this entry:— " Fine, cool, shadowy weather. Mrs. L. came to me about eleven ; she would not go to church ; Mr. L. was writing. She was very kind, and as the little group (joined by her pet spaniel) visited my bed, I f e lt h ow charming was their happy, affectionate spirit, and longed to love and enjoy life as they did. Rose twelve, joined them in garden, and answered their humorous condolences on my not being well; chatted on selfishness, indulgences, and habits. Went to flowery mound, which they admired. Boys played ; we sat and talked of great characters, Mr. Combe, Coleridge, pliancy of character, decided opini ons , l ega l caution, mental reservation, and both sides of any question. Mr. L. was not in the buoyant spirits of the day before, but he was very gentle and charming. We went round by road after a little scramble, and round into steep meadow above house. Here we paused to admire the lovely view. I went in with Mr. L., and he read me a ;passage from ' Shelley's Letters ? ' where a passage had struck me to the effect, 'that spirit cannot create, it can only conceive ; imagination can only create.' All these speculations are ingenious, but to me, as a phrenologist, there are clearer and more satisfactory ways of explaining all these things. Did not say so, and we separated to dress. Mrs. L. came in later with boys. Dinner good, beef, pigeon-pie, vegetables, dumpling, coffee, eau-de-vie. The only drawback was Atty's bad conduct, and he annoyed us all day. At last we all went out. Then through grounds to swing, where we stayed a good while. I had a long turn, and Mr. L. sent me very high ; Mrs. L. looking on. Then the nurses came in sight, and B. joined us ; his papa took him up a long while, and at length he went away. We then strolled through the meadow, and to West Woods. It was very lovely, We seated ourselves in the shelter of a high bank, and watched the scene in silence ; F., the spaniel, was on my lap, and Mr. L next me. It was the very scene I had often longed for and pictured to myself, but now it was realised ; were there not drawback ? A group of bare-legged children played near us ; several persons passed ; we sat there an hour, and at length, passing through the woods, turned into the south plantation. I wa lk e d on w ith M r . L., but without his arm, and a slight bitterness seemed to come over his spirit. I sat to rest in our own meadow, and he leaned against the rails opposite me. Mrs. L. came up with children, and we all soon went in. I made tea and enjoyed it. Mr. L. sat by me at tea and we talked for an hour on politics, hereditary descent, funds, paupers, emigration, &c. Afterwards, at nine o'clock, dismissing all boys to bed, as it was Sunday, we sat out in garden. Mrs. L. had cold, and • went in at ten. We talked of Lord Byron, of riding, of courage, of balloons, and of coolness. He smoked and chatted, and I laughed much. Mrs. L. was low. We then remained out more than an hour alone, talking of man's spirit, his life, the grave, immortality, God, the universe, man's reason, and his short fleeting nature. I expressed my gradually acquired calmness of mind, though I differed from all my friends, and had lost the hope of all illusions of the Christian's creed, and I said that the grandeur of truth made up to me for relinquished hopes. I expressed my love of reflection and deep study of these things, though I knew exactly where men must stop. He spoke sadly, said he longed to pray, longed to believe • doubted much if there were a future for man and alluded with deep feeling to the death of his poor Greek friend and fellow-student, who had spoken with hope and intelligence a few days before his death, and was now gone for ever. He seemed en tranced by the beauty of the scene. The moon rose above every cloud, and silverstars came out one by one in theblus of heaven. Silence, unbroken except by the landrail, pre vailed round us ; darkness, or rather dusk, came on beauti fully. He wished to be out all night. In the calm and magical moonlight;' but soon after eleven I felt that Mrs. L. would think us unkind to leave her, and we went to the fire. She was still low, and I tried to cheer her." The entry of October 7, 1854, one of those upon which the petitioner relied, was written not on the day when the facts were supposed:to have occurred, but on the following day, after a night of sleepless ness and dreaming. The entry itself, too, referred to dreams more than once. "He exclaimed, 'lf you say that again I'll kiss you.' You may be lieve I made no opposition, for had I not dreamed of him and of this full many a time before ?" Even setting aside Dr. Lane's contradiction, the journal itself was not evidence upon which the Court could dissolve a marriage. All these supposed crimina lities were said to have occurred in places open to the public, where no sane person would have thought of committing them ; that alone was a pre sumption against their truth. In cases of this kind the burden of proof was upon the husband; and, as there was no evidence but the diary, which was contradicted by Dr. Lane upon his oath, that proof had failed. Several months' notice had been given of the examination of Dr. Lane, yet not a single question could be asked him by Mr. Karslake tend ing to impeach his credit. The explanation of the journal was that Mrs. Robinson's mind was quite unable to distinguish between the real and the" unreal. If what she described had occurred, was it credible that she should day by day have written with her own hand a record of her infamy ? The. Chief Justice remarked that the intimacies with Dr. Lane were not described as of frequent occurrence. The journal pointed to a constant desire on her part rarely gratified by him. Mr. Bovill said, if there had been any sort of improper familiarity some witness might have been called to prove it ; but there was not a syllable of evidence to that effect. There were entries from which it appeared that she was contemplating a novel, and " I often," she said, " have the plot and groundwork in my mind during sleep, with names, scenes, and all perfect." The Chief Justice—l hope that " contemplating a novel" is no sign of a diseased mind. (Laughter.) Mr. Bovill—By no means, but the novel she contemplated was connected with events in which she imagined she had taken part. Never before had it been sought to have a lady found guilty of adultery upon such evidence as this. Not only had it been shown by the medical testimony that her state of mind was such that no reliance could be placed on her statements ; but, even taking those statements to be true, they did not amount to an admission of guilt. It was almost incredible that any woman should deliberately write a memorial of her own infamy. On these grounds he sub mitted that the case had failed against,Mrs. Robin son as well as against Dr. Lane. Mr. Montagu Chambers, in reply, submitted that Mrs. Robinson having substantially admitted her self to be guilty of adultery, the Court could not, in accordance with any known principle of law, refuse the relief for which Mr. Robinson prayed. He denied that in the Ecclesiastical Courts it was held that adultery could not be proved without some corroborative evidence. There was, however, a canon which prevented the Court from acting on an uncorroborated confession, whatever might be its own moral conviction. The case he had now made out was a case of confession, supported not only.by probabilities; but by certainties. The very journal showed that Mrs. Robinson was a sane woman, capable of discussing even the most abstruse and difficult questions. It was the journal of a very romantic, but nevertheless, of a clever woman. The foundation of the defence was that Mrs. Robinson was labouring under an uterine disease, but that foundation was one of sand. No evi dence was given as to her present state of health or as to the time when her disease was supposed to have terminated. They did not even know pre cisely what was the disease with which she was afflicted. Dr. Kidd's evidence on that point by no means went to the extent that Mrs. Robinson at the time when he was in attendance upon her was suffering under the malady which was said by him and the other medical witnesses to give rise to sexual hallucinations. He only drew the inference that she had been suffering under that malady after reading the passages in . the journal. But at the time when Dr. Kidd was attending her there were no entries in the journals which could be called hal lucinations. The journal itself from first to last contained no indications whatever of delusion. Conversations and other ordinary events were nar rated in a detailed and truthful manner. I n no point had his learned friends been able to contra.. diet that journal, except by the evidence of Dr. Lane with regard to the material passages. Dr. Lane himself impliedly confirmed its accuracy in all but those points. Mrs. Robinson was in the position of a longing woman who had fallen in love with a handsome man, and who induced him, in a hapless moment, to yield to her solicitations. Not an error had been pointed out in the diary as to any matter of fact, although there were innume rable matters mentioned which might have been proved to be false. Exaggerated and highly coloured as the language was, it was, nevertheless, perfectly true. How was it that Dr. Lane was the only person with whom she accused herself of cri- ininal intercouse? If this was all delusion Dr. - Lane was not the only man who would have been accused. Dr. Lane, as her journal stated, was for a long time, to his honour be it said, cold and reserved, and re jected her advances; but his demeanour in public was no contradiction of the charge of adultery. Unless Dr. Lane was a perfect Joseph he must have fallen under the circumstances of tenytation in which he was placed. If-he had really come forward now to vindicate an innocent woman, what a pity that he did not think of doing so when Mr. Robinson commenced the suit in the Ecclesias tical Court. Having heard that he was implicated, why did he remain silent ? If she had been inno cent, she too would have surely communicated with him. Dr. Lane's denial that he had committed adultery was the only statement that it was pos sible for him to make when called upon to vindi cate the lady accused. He was in a most difficult position ; called upon both by his own wife and by Mrs. Robinson to declare his innocence, the very kindliness of nature to which Mrs. Robinson so often alluded would induce him not to hesitate. The case was one of frightful importance to Mr. Robinson. He left it in their lordships' hands as an ordinary case of a man much tempted, who had not been able to resist temptation. The Court took time to consider their decision. BUSINESS OF THE COURT. The Chief Justice said the Court had determined that the issues in divorce causes which were set down for trial by jury should be tried before the Judge Ordinary, or some other member of the Court. The issues would then be brought into the full Court, which would decide upon the cases. The Court then rose. No day wis fixed for its sitting. To-morrow (this day) the Judge Ordinary will proceed with the case of "Marchmont v. Marchmont." -unless there was an -acknowledged engagement between the parties plaintiff could not remain in her service. To that defendant replied he in tended honourably towards the plaintiff, and on that understanding plaintiff was permitted to remain in her service. It was usual for plaintiff to go with witness when she left home. She did not, however, go with witness when she left Cannon Hall in Nov., 1856. She remained behind, but for the reason that her services were not required. She once spoke to Wemyss upon the subject of the marriage. She be lieved it was about the time she left the plaintiff behind her at the hall. Witness said she hoped he would be happy in his marriage, but added that it was a bad time to choose for marrying when his mother was ill. She had got a letter from Wemyss in Nov., 1856, informing her that the plaintiff de sired to leave her service in January. The time of marriage was not mentioned in the letter ; but it was said he or she, she forgot which, had made ar rangements accordingly. Plaintiff left her service in March, 1857. Witness never spoke to Wemyss after plaintiff went to Sheffield. She had received only one letter from Wemyss. Before leavinc , in March plaintiff had showed her a letter in defen dant's handwriting. Cross-examined by Mr. Overend—She knew the defendant's mother was very ill at the time she spoke of. The mother was a widow woman, and defendant boarded with her. Defendant paid the wages of the female servants. If one of the ser vants was about to leave defendant need not neces sarily have been informed of the circumstances un less it might be in connection with the payment of travelling expenses. It was about the 16th Feb. plaintiff went to Sheffield, and she distinctly told witness it was on account of her mother's marriage that she desired to go to Sheffield. She remained about a week or ten days. Her statement account ing for the distribution of her time was very inco herent ; but she owned subsequently that she had deceived witness. . Mrs. Sarah Corbut, mother of the plaintiff, exa mined by Mr. Macaulay—She had written to Wemyss on the subject of his engagement with her daughter. He, however, had first written to her. The first letter received from him was about the end of Jan., 1857. She had never seen the defendant at all. She did not reside in the neighbourhood ofCan Ron Hall. Her daughter came home about the end of last year, having between that time and the period of her leaving the hall lived with friends. She found her daughter very much altered in appear •ancc. She had been obliged to have medical treat ment, and she appeared to witness to suffer both in body and mind. Her daughter had, however, within the last few days obtained a situation. Cross-examined by Mr. Norval—Was quite sure her daughter did not have any other situation since leaving the hall. She resided with her sister, who is a milliner in Quebec-street; but she.was too unwell to be able to do much. This closed the plaintiff's case, with the' excep tion of the putting in of the defendant's letters, which was deferred until to-morrow (this day). The court then adjourned at a quarter past five. . ~= == 7 ,, r eorow BAIL COURT. CORI= V. WEMYSS--BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE. Mr. Macaulay and Mr. Field were counsel for the plaintiff; Mr. Overend and Mr. Cleasby for the defendant. The declaration was drawn in the usual form, and the defendant pleaded—lst, that he did not agree to marry the plaintiff; 2d, that a reasonable time had not elapsed to enable him to fulfil his engage ment ; 3d, that the plaintiff was not willing and ready to marry the defendant ; and 4th, that the plaintiff had exonerated the defendant from his promise. Mr. Macaulay, in stating the case, said the plain tiff was 26 years of age, and was at the time of the promise alleged in the service of Lady Elizabeth Stanhope, the wife of Mr. John Spencer Stanhope, of Cannon Hall, near Barnsley, in Yorkshire, as lady's maid ; and that the defendant, Charles Wemyss, was engaged in the employment of the same gentleman in the capacity of land steward. So far back as the year 1853 the defendant, having become on somewhat intimate terms with the plain tiff, commenced a correspondence with her on the occasion of her journeying with the family up to London for the season. The early letters of the defendant were written in a light, trifling tone, and in the first of them he expressed a desire that the plaintiff • would correspond with him. The plaintiff, he might tell the jury, was a native of Wales, and for that reason she always went by the name of "Taffy"—(a laugh)—amongst her fellow servants. Hence it was that throughout the cor respondence defendant addressed the plaintiff as his `Wear Taffy..." It was not until the defendant had written to the plaintiff twice that he was gra tified by receiving a letter from her in return, but from that time, which was early in May, 1853, down to the defendant's letter, marked 40, and of date the 9th of June, in the year 1857, when th e d e f en d an t di st i nc tly t o ld the plaintiff that he would rather be " hanged" than marry her, the communications between the parties were uninterrupted, and were of the most ami cable description. It was true the letters of the defendant were not of a very high-flowing character, the correspondence was not, perhaps, as warm and as thrilling as that of lovers sometimes was; but he thought, when placed before the jury, it would leave no doubt whatever upon their minds that the defendant had engaged to marry the plain tiff. The learned gentleman then read copious ex tracts from a most voluminous correspondence on the part of the defendant, showing that it was clear he stood engaged to marry the plaintiff. In the autumn of '54 Lady Elizabeth Stanhope, feeling annoyed at the reports that were going about the plaintiff and defendant, sent for the defendant, and, telling him what was afloat about him, questioned him as to his intentions with respect to the plain tiff. The defendant, however, quite set at rest all her ladyship's anxieties by declaring that his in. tentions towards the plaintiff were perfectly honour able. In fact, nothing could be more respectable and aboveboard than the whole proceeding. The mar riage was obviously for the advantage of th e y oung lady, .for the defendant occupied a m os t res p ec t a bl e position, and besides emoluments derived from a business of his own, he would ultimately have £3OO a-year as land steward at Cannon Hall. The plain tiff, on the other hand, was a young lady of most agreeable manners, was very well educated, and was thoroughly acquainted with the duties of the mistress of a household. Well, the correspondence continued in the same strain through 1855 and. 1856, and in the autumn of the latter year, on the occasion of certain festivities at the hall, defendant gave plaintiff a ring in token of the event that was about to take place between them. In the month of Nov. it, was arranged that the:marriage should soon take place, and in consequence of the departure of the family from the hall in the course of that month it was permitted the plaintiff to remain behind. The day named for the marriage was Jan. 17,1857, but as that day approached the defendant began to make excuses, and desired to postpone the fulfil ment of his promise on the pretence that he was desirous of not being married so imme diately, and then that he would much rather be married privately. But it was now that the plain tiff Was guilty of the only indiscretion with which she could be charged throughout the whole proceed ing, for, unfortunately, she was persuaded by the defendant to leave the hall and go to Sheffield without the permission of her mistress, in order that they might be married. However, the plain tiff remained at Sheffield only a few days, and re turned to the hall. On her return Lady` Elizabeth, feeling displeased at the plaintiff's absence in Shef field, questioned her on the subject, when the plaintiff revealed its exact cause, which being made known, the displeasure of Lady Elizabeth was re moved. That little interruption being got over, it was then finally determined that the marriage should take place upon the 9th March ' • and accord ingly before that day the plai n tiff l e ft the service at Cannon Hall. However, the defendant again evincing signs of .breaking through his engage ment, the plaintiff communicated with her uncle and with her mother, who at once entered into a correspondence with the defendant. In his letters to the plaintiff's mother defendant declared the reason for not completing his engagement imme diately was that his uncle, Mr. Potts, the former land steward, declined sharing his home with the defendant. To that the plaintiff's mother replied, that until the defendant had a home of his own, they (meaning the plaintiff and defendant) could live with her. And so the correspondence con tinued down to the letter of 9th June, which had been already referred to, and in which the defend ant declared he would rather be " hanged than ful fil his engagement with the plaintiff:" For the conduct of the defendant there was no possible ground of excuse ; indeed, the only reason alleged by the defendant himself in vindication of the heartless course he had pursued towards the plain tiff was, that his mother did not altogether approve of the plaintiff, and that he could not forsake his mothe; in, her old age and declining health. It was tiled for - the jury to give the plaintiff a fair and liberal compensation for the loss of an advantageous marriage. But she was further entitled to a liberal compensation at their hands in respect of the injury done to her feelings and to her prospects in life, by reason of the defendant having engrossed her affec tions during six years of the best part of her life —affections which he now heartlessly spurned. Mr. John Spence Stanhope, examined by Mr. Macaulay—The plaintiff came into my service in 1852. The defendant was originally clerk to his uncle; my steward, but he afterwards succeeded his uncle. He received a salary of £lOO a year, and was not allowed his expenses. He lived at first in his uncle's house, but afterwards removed to his mother's. He had some conversation with the de fendant respecting the marriage. That was either in November or March, 1857. He remarked then to the defendant that he supposed he ought to con gratulate him upon his marriage, when defendant said, " He suppo se d so ." Pl a i n t i ff left witness's ser vice in March, 1857. Defendant was still in his servic3. Cross-examined by Mr. Overend—lt was in May, 1852, that defendant first came into his service. It was before that he had acted as clerk to his uncle, and he lodged with his uncle, who had a small cot tage in the park, besides a salary of £l5O a year. It was to check his going to Wakefield and to the other adjoining towns too frequently that his ex penses of going and coming thence were to be borne by the defendant. Witness considered himself entitled to the whole of defendant's time. Did not recollect the exact expressions used at the interview he had had with the defendant relative to the marriage. He certainly advised defendant not to get married, as he had no home to take his wife to. Lady Elizabeth Stanhope, examined by Mr. Ma caulay—Plaintiff came into my service in 1852. In the summer of 1854 she took occasion to speak to plaintiff on the subject of her acquaintanceship with Wemyss, and then, in consequence of the rumours that reached her with reference to the courtship of the parties, she considered it necessary to have an interview with Wemyss on the subject ; but very little passed between them. However, she (the witness) said with the marriage she never had, nor ever could have, anything to do, and that POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—Nov. 26. WESTMINSTER.—PorterfieId Howitt, a youn g man respectably attired, was charged with the fol lowing shocking brutality to his brother : Robert Howitt, between 11 and 12, living at 14, Market-street, Westminster, said I live with my mother ; defendant is my brother. On Thursday he came home, and beat me ; then he told me to go into the kitchen and strip. I did, and he tied a rope into knots and beat me all over till the blood ran out of me. (Sensation). I don't know why he beat me. My mother was not at home. He did not give me any reason whatever. He went up stairs and told the people to hold their noise, and then I ran out. I took off everything I had on be fore I was beaten, and went out in the streets in that state. He is a wood carver, and has not beaten me like this before. Cross-examined by defendant—He did not tell me he beat me for robbing my employers, and stopping away from my work. He did not ask me to explain what I had done with the money. Witness answered all the questions decidedly. The cord was here produced, and had nine large knots in It. Thomas Slaughter, 8, Market-street, opposite de fendant's house, said—l heard a boy halloo out " Murder !" " Save me!" I ran over the way and saw the elder brother running after the other, who was quite naked, in the street. I took the poor boy to my place. His brother came over and said he would make me give him up, and he would give him some more yet ! I took him to my landlord. He has not one inch of solid flesh on him, and many of the places are bleeding. He has been served scandal ously. This was not all. This morning the prose cutor was in the area with only his trousers on, out in the cold, and I made him go inside. His mother knew of his being beaten. Cross-examined—You did say you would give him some more—you saidyou would cut him in two. Thomas Cording, landlord of last witness, said— The boy was brought into my shop for protection. Prisoner declared he would have him, dared me to keep him, and talked about an action. It was dreadful to look at the boy. It made us com pletely shudder. (Cries of" Shame.") I believe his mother knew his b ro th er was going to beat him, and went out, in order not to hear his cries. Butcher, 109 B, said he was called to 8, Market street. Prosecutor and prisoner were there ; the former said his brother had made him lay down on the kitchen floor while he beat him. I asked him why he had done it ? He said it was no business of mine. At the station-house he pulled out the cord, and said he had merely given his brother a " little chastisement." The b o y is one mass of sores, and his little arms are shocking to look at. He is sores and weals all over. Defendant said complainant had been working for Mr. Birch, the omnibus and cab proprietor, and had latterly stolen some money from him, and stayed away from his work. He wanted to lead him away from such evil courses, and considered himself of sufficient age t o b ea t th e boy. In answer to inquiries from the magistrates, he said he was 22. Mr. Arnold said the mother was the proper per• son to beat her son ; 'why had she not done so ? Defendant said. his mother was not fit to beat him. Mr, Arnold hoped not to that extent. Mr. Birch said the boy was employed by a young woman in his mother's family, and had been very much petted by her; latterly he had stolen various sums of money from her; and had sometimes stayed away from his work two days together. He had got into bad oompany and was a very bad boy. The prisoner, a very respectable young man, had beaten him, he having no father, and he was afraid his rage at his brother's repeated misconduct had caused him to beat the boy too severely. The mother, a very quiet-looking woman, who stated that she knew the defendant was about to beat his brother, said she did not know he would have hurt him so much. It was very cruel of him, and it would not have occurred had she been at home. Defendant hoped the magistrate would be lenient with him, as he helped to support his mother and her family. Mr. Arnold said great cruelty had been used. He would remand the accused, and should like the poor little fellow to be examined by a surgeon. CLF , RKENWELL.—Mr. Richard Canty, of Ra here-street, Goswell-road, applied that the property found upon the deceased Charles Canty, murdered by Edward Tombs, and also what had been t a k en possession of by the police, might be given up to him. He had been left sole executor, and the books belonging to the deceased were required by his partner to enable the business to be carried on. Mr. Inspector Witham, of the E division, pro duced the will, and said that the police had no ob jection to the property being given up. The order was at once taken. The deceased, it is arranged, will be buried on Sunday next, at the Bow Cemetery. MARYLEBONE.--Eliza Gook and Mary Ann Armstrong, well-dressed females, the former 19, and the latter 13 years of age, were brought up by Rowe, 201 S, charged with the following robbery of a lady. It appeared from the evidence that at 11 that morning Miss Annie Tacon, 31, Albert-street, Re gent's-park, got into one of the London General omnibuses near Trinity-church ; and that when near Tottenham-court-road, W. Newell, the conductor, distinctly saw the younger prisoner Armstrong take a. portemonnaie from the lady's pocket ; shortly afterwards both the prisoners desired to be let out, and on the vehicle being brought to a stand they were in the act of alighting when Newell asked the lady if she had lost anything ; she felt the pocket of her dress, and found that she had been robbed. He laid hold of Armstrong, whom he charged with the theft, when she threw the portemonnaie on the step of the bus, saying that the lady had dropped it inside. Prisoners were both given into custody. Cook was discharged, and Armstrong, who pleaded. guilty, was sent to hard labour in the House of Correction for six months. William Bryant, a stiff-built young fellow, was charged with being concerned, with three other prisoners now in custody, in the following daring garotte robbery. It appeared from the evidence that as a young man named Alfred Letolffe was on his way home to Little North-street, Lisson-grove, on Saturday night last, and when near his own house, he was seized a very violent from behind, and thrown down in manner. Some men then knelt on his throat, and another held his arm, while a third knelt on his chest. A fourth was busy at his pockets, from which he took eight pawnbroker's duplicates, and 3s. sr 4s. in silver. Ireland, 201 I), was on duty near the spot, when he heard a stifled cry of " Get off my throat or you'll choke me ;" and upon his going up to where the cries came from, he observed the young man on the ground with the four men in the postion before described. When they saw him approaching with two other constables, the four men got up and made off in different directions. Ireland left one of the constables in charge of Le tolffe, who was quite insensible and black in the face. The prisoners were pursued, and three of them captured, and the prisoner at that time escaped. A pawn ticket, a silver pencil case, and 2s. Bd. in money were found on them. The prose cutor, before he could proceed to the station to en ter the charge, was obliged to be taken to the hos pital, as lie was so badly treated. His trowscrs were so very much torn as to be quite worthless. The prisoner, in reply to the worthy magistrate, said he knew nothing about the matter, as he was not there at the time. _ _ He was ordered to be remanded till next Mon day, to be brought up with the other prisoners. SOUTHWARK.—James Lyall, a journeyman parchment cutter, was brought before Mr. Bur cham, charged with stabbing George Lyall, his brother, with a parchment knife, thereby inflicting such a severe injury on him as to confine him to his bedin St. Thomas's Hospital. Daniel George Lyall, a youth about 16 years of age, and son of the injured man, said that they all lived at 3, Smith's-gardens, his uncle, the prisoner, occupying apartments above. Near one o'clock in the morning witness went home, and not being able to get in he pushed at the door. He was admitted, and then he asked who shut him out, when the pri soner said he did. His father then came down, and angry words were used, when he saw his uncle rush out with a knife in his hand. His father and uncle then had a scuffle together in the dark, when he heard the former call out " You have stabbed me." Witness called in the police and his uncle seeing a wound on the fleshy part of the right arm fetched a piece of flannel and bound it up. The constable then came and had his father conveyed to the hospital, where he now remains. Police-constable 291 M said that between one and (two o'clock he was called to No. 3, Smith's gardens, when he saw the wounded man reclining on the stairs, with the upper part of his right arm, bound with flannel. He took him to the hospital, when it was found that he had a deep cut on the fleshy part of the arm, and the doctor told him he had lost two quarts of blood. The prisoner told witness that he inflicted the wounds, but he had no intention of doing it ; they had a scuffle in the dark, and he was not aware that he had the knife in his hand., Witness took him into custody, and at the stationhouse he seemed extremely sorry for his brother's sufferings. Mr. Burcham remanded the prisoner until Wed -nesday next, for the attendance of the surgeon. FROM THE GAZETTE OF YESTERDAY. WAR-OFFICE, Nov. 22. The Queen has been graciously pleased to give orders for the appointment of Samuel Petrie,• Esq., Director of the Commissariat Department of her Majesty's Army, to:be an Ordinary Member of the Civil Division of the Third Class, or_Companions, of the Most Honourable Order of the Bath. • WAR-OFFICE, Nov. 25. The Queen has been graciously pleased to give orders for the appointment of the undermentioned Officer of his Imperial Majesty the Emperor of the French, to be an Honorary Member of the Military Division of the Third Class, or Companions, of the Most Honourable Order of the Bath, viz.:-- M. Jean Nicolas Eugene Melchior, Major du Regiment d'Artillerie a pied de la Garde Imperiale. WHITEHALL, Nov 26. The Queen has been pleased to direct letters patent to be passed under the Great Seal, granting the dignity of a Knight of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland unto Charles Clifford, Esq., the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the colony of New Zealand. FOREIGN-OFFICE, Nov. 23. The Queen has been graciously pleased to appoint Ed ward Herries, Esq., now Secretary to her Majesty's Lega tion at Lisbon, to be Secretary to her Majesty's Legation at Brussels. The Queen has also been graciously pleased to appoint Henry Page Turaer Barron, Esq., now paid Attache to her Majesty's Legftion at Brussels, to be Secretary to her Majesty's Legation at Lisbon. FOREIGN-OFFICE, Nov. 24. The Queen has been pleased to approve of Mr. Henry Eugene Angelucci as Vice-Consul at Bombay for his Ma jesty the Emperor of the French. COUNTY OF HEREFORD. In consequence of the death of Thomas William Booker Blakemore, Esq., late M.P. for the county of Hereford, a warrant will be issued for the election of a new member at the end of 14 days from this date. WAR-OFFICE, TRALL-MALL, Nov. 26. 2d Regiment of Dragoon Guards—George Batley, Gent., to be Cornet, by purchase, vice Metcalfe, appointed to the 7th Light Dragoons. 4th Dragoon Guards—The first Christian name of Lord Seymour, appointed to a Cornetcy, in the Gazette of the 29th October, 1858, is Edward, not Louis, as previously stated. 6th Dragoon Guards—Lieut F. A. Weatherley to be Ad jutant, vice Graham, who resigns the Adjutancy only. 7th Dragoon Guards—Lieut. James Vance Cleland to be Captain, by purchase, vice Goff, who retires ; Cornet E. Molyneux to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Cleland. 7th Light Dragoons—Cornet Edward Metcalfe, f.-om the 2d Dragoon Guards, to be Cornet, vice Steuart, pro moted; Edmund H. Kennard, Gent., to be Coi.iet, by purchase, vice the Hon. C. Molyneux, promoted. 17th Light Dragoons—George Berkeley Belcher, Gent., Accountant in the late Land Transport Corps, to be Paymaster, 'Ace Bennett, who reverts to half-pay as Paymaster of a Depot Battalion. 4th Regiment of Foot—Henry Albert Fuller, Gent., to be Ensign, without purchase, vice Hammond, promoted. sth Foot—George Toddrick Beasley, Gent., to be Ensign, without purchase, vice Cooch, promoted. Bth Foot—Ensign James Seager Wheeley to be Lieutenant, without purchase, vice Black, deceased ; Ensign Robert D. Forbes Shirreff to be Lieutenant, vice Wheeler, whose promotion from the 94th Foot. as stated in the Gazette of Oct. 1, 1853, has been cancelled Ensign John Coleberd to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Wheeley, whose pro motion, by purchase, on Oct. 15, has been cancelled. 13th Foot—Lieutenant Francis Drewe Edwards, from the 86th Foot, to be Lieutenant, vice Stewart, who ex changes. 14th Foot—Stainsby Henry Pigott, Gent., to be Ensign, without purchase, vice F rancis F ox Robinson, super seded, being absent without leave. 16th Foot—Lieutenant John. Pennefather, from the 72d Foot, to be Lieutenant, vice Crane, who exchanges ; Ensign George Within to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Rogge, promoted. 18th Foot—Charles Orchard Cornish, Gent., to be Ensign, without purchase. 20th Foot—Ensign Robert Foster-Melliar to be Lieute nant, by purchase, vice Carden, promoted. 21st Foot—Lieutenant John Finlay, from the 78th Foot, to be Captain, without purchase, vice Weekes, whose promotion from the 78th Foot, on the 10th Sept. 1858, has been cancelled. 37th Foot—Major Edward D. Atkinson to be Lieutenant- Colonel, by purchase, vice Brevet-Colonel Skelly, who retires ; Captain Robert Prescott Harrison to be Major, by purchase, vice Atkinson. 41st Foot—Montagu Thomas Ball Michell, Gent., to be Ensign, without purchase, vice Gwynne, promoted in the 20th Foot. 49th Foot—William Stevenson, Gent., to be Ensign, with out purchase, vice Gilson, promoted in the 22d Foot ; John Holmes, Gent., to be Ensign, with ou t p urc h ase , vice Dolmage, promoted in the 22d Foot. 58th Foot—Lieut. Henry. Hingeston to be Instructor of Musketry. 65th Foot—Ensign Falcon Peter Leonard to be Lieutenant, without purchase, vice Wemyss, deceased. 71st Foot—Ensign James Hay Campbell to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Browne, promoted ; Lieut. James Hay Campbell to be Adjutant, vice Cowburn, deceased; Assis tant-Surgeon John Warren, from the Staff, to be Assis tant-Surgeon, . i ke Pirrie, who resigns; 72d Foot—Lieutenant Henry Arthur Crane, from the 16th Foot, to be Lieutenant, vice Pennefather, who ex changes. 78th Foot—Lieutenant Alfred Wickham Pym Weekes to be Captain, without purchase, vice Foster, deceased ; Ensign Alexander Ewing to be Lieutenant, without pur chase, vice Weekes ; Ensign Thomas Hinde Thompson to be Lieutenant, without purchase, vice Ewing, whose promotion on the 10th Sept., 1858, has been cancelled ; Henry Swanson, Gent., to be Ensign without purchase, vice Thompson. 80th Foot—Ensign Samuel Pollock Muirhead, Gent., to be Ensign, without purchase, vice Keogh, promoted in 14th Foot. 86th Foot—Ensign Stephen Wm. Sewell to bo Lieutenant, without purchase, vice Coates, deceased ; Lieutenant Duncan Stewart, from the 13th Foot, to be Lieutenant, vice Edwards, who exchanges ; Ensign Charles Keane to be Lieutenant, without purchase, vice Sewell, whose promotion on Bth Oct., 1858, has been cancelled. 89th Foot—Augustus Wm. nice, Gent., to be Ensign, without purchase, vice the Hon. W. H. B. Ogilvy, whose transfer from the 26th Foot, has been cancelled. 90th Foot—The second Christian name of Ensign Carleton, appointed on 12th Nov., is Hone, and not Home, as pre viously stated. 95th Foot—Capt. John Webbs Butt, from half-pay Unat tached, to be Captain, repaying the difference, vice Bre vet-Major Alexander J. J. Macdonald, who exchanges ; Lieut. Charles Frederick Parkinson to be Capt a i n , b y purchase, vice Butt, who retires ; Ensign W m . P earson to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Parkinson; William George Remfry Herd, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Pearson. Gold Coast Artillery Corps—Lieut. James T. W. Andrews to be Captain, without purchase, vice Craig, who retires rank of ant, Ns upon half-pay ; Ensign an d Adj utant Francis John Bol tonLieutenantithout; Ensign purcha T , Thomas AI G I Danger haveto be e he L i drews. DEPOT BATTALIONptain Archibald J. Oliver Rutherford, 70th Foot, to be Instructor of Musketry. ROYAL MILITARY COLLEGE.—Sergeant Major John Davies to be Quartermaster. UNATTAC HED. — Brevet-Lieut.-Colonel Charles Holden, from Captain, o n h a lf- pay U nattac h e d , and Staff Officer of Pensioners, to be Major, without purchase. B Captain J o h n Wells Butt,, 95th EVET. Foot, to be Major in the Army. Brevet-Major John Wells Butt, 95th Foot, to be Lieu tenant -Colonel in the Army. • The following promotions to take place consequent on the promotion of Colonel Ord, of the Royal Engineers ' to be Major-G enera l, i n success i on to Major-General Sir William Reid, K.C.8., deceased : Brevet-Lieutenant-Colonel Richard Blacklin, Captain OA half-pay Unattached, to be Colonel, Major William Wynne lit )dder, 56th Foot, to be Litt tenant-Colonel. _ _ Captain John Bayly, Rilyal Engineers, to be Major. The following.promotio - as to take place consequent on the death of Lieut.-General'. Thomas Lightfoot, C. 13., on 15th November, 1858: Major-General Edward Byam, Colonel of the 18th Light Dragoons, to be Lieutenitn. - t-General. Brevet-Colonel Henry EjTe, half-pay Unattached, Cow mandant at Chatham, to b© Major-General. Brevet Lieutenant-Colon el Walter Campbell, Captain upon half-pay Unattached, and Staff Officer of Pensioneral to be Colonel. Brevet-Major Bertram Charles Mitford, Captain upon half-pay Unattached, and Town Major of Malta, to b° Lieutenant-Colonel. Captain. Pearson Scott Thompson, 14th Light Dragoons? to be Major. COMMISSIONS BY LORDS LIEUTENANT_ Royal Anglesey Regiment of Light Infantry—Adjutant E. 0. Pcarse to serve with the rank of Captain. Royal Radnor Militia—Richard Winstanley Ormerody Gent., to be Ensign, vice Edward Williams, appointed to the 69th Foot. 2d Somerset Regiment of Militia—Lieutenant Richard Marker to be Captain, vice Lumsden, resigned. Dorset Regiment of Militia—Ensign Robert Clayton Brown to be Lieutenant, vice Henning, deceased. Royal North Gloucester Regiment of Militia—Ensign :Robert Baynes Reed to be Lieutenant, vice Withal Stevens Perry Keene, resigned; Ensign William Clarke to ibe Lieutenant, vice Thomas Hunt, resigned. Ist Devon Regiment of Militia—John Davie Ferguson )avie, late Captain in Grenadier Guards, to be Lieutenant' C 7olonel Commandant, vice Drewe, resigned. Devon Militia Artillery—Thomas Reynolds Arseott to be S econd Lieutenant. PRIZE MONEY. Department of the Aeconntant-General of the Nagy, Admiralty, Somerset-houMe, Nov. 22. Notice is hereby given to all persons interested therei, th at preparations are :low making for the intended distil' by tion of the award voted by Parliament for the destrue' tic nof pirates in the • China Seas •by her Majesty's shiP 1 - 1( , rnet on the 19th March, •1857; and the award for sal' var-e services rendered • to the merchant vessel Abyssinisul by her Majesty's ship Tortoise, between the 16th May Oa 19t h July, 1856. 11. gents or other persons having any just and legal de' nut nd, unliquidated, against tho said proceeds are required to. - transmit the particulars of any such demand to the Re' gis;trar of the High Court of Admiralty, in order that the saw ie may be examined, taxed, and allowed by that officer, and paid uuder the sanction. of the Judge of the said Court. s•I ..gents and other persons .holding powers of attortKr prig y orders, assignments, or• other instruments, by virtue of vi -hich they may be legally entitled to claim the share bel* aging to any captor, are requested, with as little delay , as possible, to transmit the sam e , accom p an i e d b y the niitu* documents, to the Prize Branch of the Department of the Accountant-General of the Navy, Admiralty, Somerset' house. Due notice will be given, by future advertisements in the Lc nidon Ga:ette , of the date proposed for the commence: m.?.nt of distribution; and, at the same time, the amount of an. individual's share in the respective classes will be. aw neunced. BANKRUPTCY ANNULLED. George Whieldon, briekmaker, Wineanton, Dorgetehire. BANKRUPTS. Robert Pigg-, grocer, North Tuddenham, Norfolk, to surrender, Dec. 9, at one, and Jan. 13, at twelve, at 0 6 Court of Bankruptcy. Joseph Elliot, grocer, Devonport, Dec. 13 and lan. ler at one, at the Athenaeum, Plymouth. John. Bradley, starch dealer, Manchester, Dec. 11 and Jan. 11, at twelve, at the M a n c h es t er Di s t r i c t C our t. James Beeson, ironfounder, Derby, Dec. 9, and 30, at half past ten, at the Shirehall, Nottingha m . William roollatt, lace manufacturer, Nottingham, Dec. 9, and 30, at half-past ten, at the Shirehall, Nottingham. Stephen Cox, chemical manufacturer, Bristol, Dec. . and Jan. 10, at eleven, at the Bristol District Court. . Thomas Haynes, farmer, Chiddingstone, Kent, Dec. 7r at half-past two, and Jan. 4, at two, at the Court of Bank ruptcy. Edward Button, butcher, Gravesend, Dec. 9, at half-pe 4 eleven, and Jan. 13, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. John Perkins, ship-owner, Sandwich, Kent, Dec. 10, at two, and Jan. 4, at half-past two, at the Court of Bank ruptcy. Joseph Cooper, licensed victualler, Birmingham,and 27, at eleven, at:the Birmingham District Cou rt. Dec. De c .• . George Battison Haines and John Metcalf, eleetro platers, Birmingham, Dec. 16 and Jan. 6, at eleven, at the Birmingham District Court. William Goddard, shoe manufacturer, Leicester, Dec. 9 and 30, at half-past ten, at the Nottingham District Court. George Taylor , licensed victualler, Swinderby, Lincoln shire, Dec. 9 and3o, at half-past ten, at the Nottingham District Court. William Whittington Morris, chemical merchant, late of Sise-lane, City, Dec. 6, at one, and Jan. 10, at two, at tha Court of Bankruptcy. BANK OF ENGLAND. An Account, pursuant to the Act 7th and Bth Victvriol cap. 32, for the week ending on Wednesday, the 24th del of November, 1858: ISSUE DEPARTMENT. Notes issued X 32,609,4801 Government Debt £11,01,3, 1 _,,° G Other Securities .. Gold Coin & Bullion 18,134, 400 Silver Bullion .... /32,609,480 X 32,609,480; BANKING D : Proprietors' Capi tal .£14,553,000 Rest Public Deposits (in cluding Exche quer, Savings' Banks,. Commis anissioners of Isla: tionat Debt, and Dividend Ac-. . , EPARTMIINT. Government Secu rities (including Dead WeightAn- 08 5 0 nutty) XIO,B .1'774 Other Securities . • 15,32- . , - Notes Gold and Silver Gan " • - - • „ 645,850 counts) 7,671,799 Other Deposits 12,820,861 seven Day and other Bills 830,217 £39,029,245 £39,029,2 45 M. MARSHALL, Chief Cashier. Dated Nov. 25, 1858. AVERAGE PRICE OF SUGAR. The Average Price of Brown or Muscovado Sugar com puted from Returns made in the week ending the 23d dal of Nov., 1858, exclusive of the duties of Customs paid , or payable thereon, on the importation thereof into Great Britain : Per cwt. From the British possessions in America 27s Muscovado, the produce of the Mauritius —s Od Muscovado, the produce of the East Indies 29s 3d Average price of the foregoing 27s 6d LOCAL SHARE MARKETS. BIEMINGIIAM—Nov. 26. The market was very quiet at the opening, and continued so throughout the day, but closed better. South Stafforclor 101 F-London and North-Westerns, 94---Great WesterP4 531 —Birmingham New Union Mills, 20/. LEEDS—Nov. 26. There was very little business, and prices rather better• London and South-Westerns, 321—Dovers, 74f—North Western, 11I—Great Western, 53 13-16—Crystal Palace, £1 13s. 3d. MANCHESTER—NOV. 26. The market was inactive, and prices closed firmer, espe cially for London and North-Western and Sheffield stocks. —London and North W es t erns , 91a I—Dovers, 22F Eastern Counties, 12.7-16—Sheffields, 35 t. LivEnrooL—Nov. 26. The transactions in this market to-day were as follows —North British, 551 6l—York and North Midland, 761-- -Eastern Counties, 12 7-16 14—Midland, 98--Chester and Holyheads, 36 I—Caledonians, 86 86f—Lancashire and Yorkshire, .9,5 /—London and North-Westerns, 91 East Lancashire, • 931 91—Dutch Rhenish, 4, 31 Grand Trunk of Canada, -9} 9-16---North Western, 111—• Leeds Northern, 471-lovers, 22 5-16 I—Berwicks, 92} 3 —Blackburns, 11 i—Birkenheads, 66 661—Great Western of Canada, 181 I. [ADVERTISEMEN7.I—Rarey's Horse and Cattle Improv ing Food is equally adapted to improve the stamina of ill conditioned. Horses, Cows, Bullocks, Calves, Sheep, a nd Pigs. It causes no extra expense,.as it contains far more and better nourishment than its cost of lid. per feed stip' plies in corn and hay ; hence ensures an actual saving in the keep. But its principal advantages are a great improve ment in the digestiVe fuitetions, the stamina and genera condition of horses enabling them to perform far more labour without iTetting distressed. It imparts new vigour - to sick, debilitated, or Old 'apparently worn-out horsee, and - it puts rapidly the finest flesh on cattle generally, and im proves the, milk in cows, as it enables them to extract the entire nourishment out of everything they feed on. Rarer and Co., 77, • Regent's •Quadrant, Piccadilly, London. Packed in tins olabout 90. feeds, 11s.• ' in casks of about 450 feeds, 50s. ; of about 1,000 feeds, L 5, beiag about lid. per feed. BIRTHS. GILBERT.—On the 24th inst., at Ashby Hall, Norfolk, the wife of Robert Gilbert, Esq., of a daughter. RANDOLPH.—On the 25th inst., at 72, Harley-street, the Hon. Mrs. Leveson Randolph, of a son. — TiIYNNE.—On the 24th inst., at Linwood, Lyndhurst, the Lady Edward Thynne, of a daughter, stillborn. WILLIAMS.—On the 23d inst., .at 46, - .Cornhill, Mrs. A. H. Williams, of a daughter ' MARRIAGES. ' KlNG — Gaoost.—On the 25th inst., at St. Paul's.;Knights bridge, Edmund King, Esq., of the Manor House, Boar hunt, Hants, to Selina Long, fifth •daughter of the late W. Groom, Esq. HIELD—HEAVEN.—On the 25th. inst., at St. 3fargaret`s, Wesmtminster, Mr. Meld, of Manor-place, Upper Nor wood, Surrey, to Annie, the youngest daughter of }Jr. Heaven, of Stroud, Gloucestershire. DEATHS. BRIDGEMAN.—On the 26th inst., at Weston-under-Liziarcip the Lady Charlotte Bridgeman, second surviving daugh ter of the Earl of Bradford. BAXENDALE.—On the 26th inst., at 5, Gloucester-gardenFo Hyde-park, Lloyd Salisbury Baxendale, Esq., aged Ti. BAILANTYNE.—On the 25th inst., at 5, Eastcott-place , Kentish-town, Margaret, wife of Mr. Thos. Ballantynet editor and proprietor of the Statesman, aged 49. BULL.—On the 25th inst., at the Green, Stockwell, John Bull, Esq., aged 75. CRANSTOUN.—On the 22d inst., the Right Hon. Anna Linnington, Lady Cranstoun, wife of the late Lord Craw stoun, and mother of the present Lord. CLARK.—On the 24th inst., at Dalston, Mr. Wm. Henry Clark, aged 28. MACKENZIE.—On the 24th inst., at Kensington, Sir Jas' Sutherland Mackenzie, Bart., of Tarbet, aged . park, Stoke N ew i ng t on, J o h n Smith, SMITH.—On the 26th i ns t ., a t 4 , K e l so -terrace, Mildmay hithe, and 5, Austinfriars, Old Broad-street, in his lo w year Esq., late of Greelow LONDON : Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG, of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the county of Middlesex, Saturday, November 27, 1858. ~~ :r9./~ -~---- ~,_.