The Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1860-12-11 00:00:00

ECCLESIASTICAL INTELLIGENCE.

BENEFICES AND APPOINTMENTS VACANT.
RECTORIES.
Oxford St. Clement: val. £120: pat. Lord Chancellor: Rev.
E. A. Litton, prom.
Ulcombe, Kent : dio. Canterbury : val. £379, with residence
pat. lion: C. B. C. Wandesford , Rev. S. Mence, dec.
PERPETUAL CURACIES.
Islington, St. Matthew. Middlesex : dio. London : val. £250
pat. P. C. of St...Piral, Balls' Pond : Rev. E. T. Alder, dec.
Islington, St Michael, Middlesex : dio. London : Rev. L. R
Ayre, prom . ,

• - CHAPLAINCY.-
Batavia : British Consular; Rev. J. E. Scott-Monerieff, dee.

CURACY.
Feliskirk : co. and dio. York.
P.
PROFESSORSHI
• •
Edinburgh Univcrsity: Ecclesiastical History : Rev. Dr.
Robert Son, dcc.

LECTURESHIP.
roreester Pio Tsan Training College : Junior L otureship :
salary AlOO, with rooms, commons, Bte. : testimonials before
Dec. 20.

MASTERSMPS.
Cheltenham College : EleMentary Classical.
Holston Grammar School : salary 20 marks: testimonials to
the Rev. R. C. Powles, Blackheath, before Dec. 15.

The parish audit took place yesterday before
Rees, the district auditor, but we understand that no
objection to any part of the accounts *as lodged.
LIVERPOOL EYE AND EAR INFIRMARY, MOUNT-
PLEASANT.—ConsuIting Surgeon, Dr. Hugh Neil,
F.R.A.S. ; Surgeons, Dr. R. Hibbert Taylor, Dr. Nevins,
T. Bickerton, Esq. ; Assistant Surgeon Robert Batty,
Esq. ; Treasurer, J. G. Livingston, . Esq. Report for
the week ending Dec. 8, 1860 :—New cases : Eyes,
61; Ears, 28. Prescribed for and received surgical
assistance : Eyes, 306 ; Ears, 100.
COUNTY MAGISTRATES' COURT, YESTERDAY.—(Before
Messrs. Preston and Chaloner.)—Michael Beady was
fined 20s. and Bs. 6d. costs for drunkenness and*assault-
ing police-constable 100, at Old Swan, on Saturday.—
John Miningan, was remanded on a charge of deserting
from the Royal Artillery at Woolwich.—John Carroll
and Michael Carroll, were fined ss. and costs each, for
fighting and disorderly conduct on Sunday evening, in
the village of Bootle.
TUE MARKETS COMMITTEE.—The usual weekly meet-
ing of the Markets Committee was held yesterday in
the Council-chamber,—Mr.,Alderman Woodruff in the
chair. The other members of the committee present
were Messrs. Ridley, Johnson, Clarke, Aspinall, Nickson,
Haydock, Shimmin, and Holden. The minutes of last
meeting were read and' confirmed. From the financial'
statement It appeared that the receipts rrom the 2nd
December, of 1858, to the 6th of December, 1859, were
£3,952 14s. 3d., and for the same period in the present
year, £4,074 Os. 4d., showing an increase .of £5OO on
the receipts, which the ;chairman considered very satis-
factory. The wages of 1859 were £573 3s. Gd., and for
the corresponding- period this year were £604 2s. The
superintendent of the markets reported that 19,630 lbs.
of unwholesome meat had been seized during the Week
in the northern district, and in the central district,
from the 31st August to the 6th of December, there had
been seized 17,274 lbs. of unwholesome meat, and of
unwholesome fish (cod), from the 31st of August to the
6th of December, 27,074 lbs. were seized.
REMITTANCES BY POSTAGE STAMPS—PURCHASE OF
STAMPS BY THE POST OFFICE.—III order to afford
facility for turning into cash the numerous small remit-
tances now made in postage stamps, and thus to dis-
courage the practice of sending coin in letters, the Post-
master Generaf has directed that the head offices of
Manchester, Liverpool, and Edinburgh shall purchase
portage stamps from the public, charging a small dis-
count for the accommodation. This practice, is now.
in operation at the head office in Manchester; and
postage stamps, provided they be not soiled or 6therwise
damaged, are purchased in any quantities—from two
upwards—in the inquiry-room, at the and of the box
lobby, in Brown-street, and at the Money-order Office,
in King-street, between the hours of nine a.m. and five
p.m. The Receiving offices arc not empowered to pm.;
chase stamps.
BOROUGH SESSIONS.—The following prisoners were
sentenced yesterday . James John Horrocks (22),
joiner, being a servant to one Susannah Robina Wood-
worth, did receive and take into his possession, for and
on account of his said mistress, the several sums •of
Gs., Bs. 6d., and. 9s. 6d., and did afterwards feloniously
embezzle the same—five days. Ann Golding (21),
stealing two dresses and the sum of 10d., the monies and
property of Patrick Furlong—three years' penal servi-
tude. Mary Garrity (36), stealing. one tumbler glass,
the property of Richard O'Brien—three months.
Abraham Thomas (23), clerk, and John Gee (39),
tinnian, stealing. one pump, the property of Joseph
Bispham—the former four years, and the latter four
months. Michael Hemmingway (21), porter, stealing
one coat, the property of William Healing—six months.
Susan Lester (51)' and Thomas Lester (55)—Susan.Lester
was charged with stealing two chairs and a table, the
property of Joseph' Duffield, and a clothes maiden, the
property of Edward MsCallum, and one chair; the pro-
perty of Joseph Pat.tison Moore; and Thomas Lester
was charged with receiving the same, he well knowing
them to have been feloniously stolen- :the fdimer 'four
months, 4lie latter diScharged. Jane Williams -(40),
stealing two pairs of boots, the property of Thos. Pugh
Jones-7-six weeks.' 'John Brew (38), labourer, stealing
one silver medal, the property of William Caldwell, the
elder—six: months. Christopher Gallagher (42), being
a servant to John Cropper and others, did receive and
take into his possession, for and on account of his said
masters, the several sums of £1 12s. Bd., 10s. Bd.,
£1 Bs.. ld., Os. 7d., Gs. 3d., and Gs., .and did after yards
feloniously embezzle the same—five months. Catherine
Fitzgerald (37), stealing one decanter, one tumbler
glass, one shawl, and other goods, the property of James
M‘Dine—four years. Roger M'Anally (27), carter,
stealing the.sum of 125., the willies of Robert AbrahaM,
from his person—five years. Mary .Connor (27) and
Elizabeth Ralph (74)—Mary Connor was charged with
stealing one coat, the property of Peter Edmond, and
Elizabeth Ralph was charged•with receiving the same,
she well knowing it to have been feloniously stolen—
the former five, and, the latter four months. Samuel
Henry Longdin (21), clerk, being a servant to one Geo.
Turner, did receive and did take into his possession, for
and on account of his said master, the several sums of
12s. and 35., and did afterwards feloniously embezzle
the same—three months. James Clarke (40), plasterer,
stealing the sum of 9s. '4d., the monies of Thos. Holland
—discharged. 'William Nolan (20), labourer, and Owen
Begley (20), labourer, charged with having unlawfully
made an assault upon one Johnson Mathews, with
intent to steal the monies of the said Johnson athews
—each three months,

COURT FOR DIVORCE & MATRIMONIAL
.CAUSES.--DEC: -

(Before the Judge ordinary and a,Common Jury.)
FISIIER V. Ftsualt.
Dr. Phillimore, C.C., Mr. Ilannen, and Mr. Pritchard
appeared for the petitioner; Mr. Serjeant Shoe, Mr. D.
D. Keane, and Mr. Lewis for the respondent.
The petition was by a wife for a dissolution of marriage
on the ground of adultery, coupled with cruelty. The
husband pleaded a denial of those allegations, condana
,tion, and a counter charge of adultery.
Mr. Serjeant Shee, in his address to the jury for the
respondent, said he was not in a position to deny that
the charge of adultery had been established, but con-
tended that the petitioner had failed to prove that her
husband had heen guilty of such violence that she could
not continue to Cohabit with him with Out danger to her
life and health. He had always provided her with a
comfortable home, and appeared to have gone to consi-
derable expense in keeping a carriage and horses for her
tise. Her own conduct in going so often to dine with
him in the city showed that she was attached to him,
and that he could not have been habitually cruel to her.
The only two instances of serious violence to which she
spoke Were committed in July, 1849, ,and' December,
1858. In the first instance Mrs. Fisher admitted that
she had been guilty of an improper act in opening his
private letters, and the letters which passed between
them after she left her husband's house on that occasion
proved that she went away of her own accord. The
respondent would explain the circumstances under which,
after their return from Gravesend a few weeks later, she
again went to her mother's. Her letter of the .7th of
August was evidently written by a woman who had
grievously injured her husband and hoped to be restored
to his favour. If the husband bad been guilty of any
unnecessary severity it was under great provocation.
With regard to the assault complained of in December,
1858, he accused her of the very acts of violence. which
she attributed to him. It would be for the jury to
decide between the conflicting statements of the two
parties. The learned serjeant, in conclusion stated. the
evidence on which he should rely to establish the counter
charge of adultery against #l6 petitioner.
Mr. Fisher stated that he did not recollect throwing a
boot at his wife in 1847. It might be true that he had
done so, or it might not. • She was generally very touchy,
and annoyed him at night with curtain lectures ; she
frequently scratched his leg with her too nails, and he
had told her that she cultivated them On purpose. She
Was sometimes considerate, but occasionally flew into
violent passions. She would be good or ill tempered for
a month at a time. She' struck him three or four times
between his marriage and July', 1849, and once scratched
his face. He might have thrown the contents of his
plate in her face ; he once struck her with a stick, not
a very thick one. _ _

The Judge Ordinary.—lt is imputed to us in Eng-
land that we allow a husband to beat his wife with a
stick if it is not above a certain thickness, but I have
always repudiated the doctrine.
The respondent further said that this happened not as
he was coming in late one night, but as he was going
out one evening. He supplied her with everything
necessary for her comfort and kept a carriage for her.
He ejected her from the house about 6 o'clock on Sunday
evening in 1849. He wrote her a letter in which he
referred to " his indiscretion," not on the 10th of July,
the date written upon it in pencil, but after he had
turned her out of the house and after the reconciliation.
They had a difference on account of her having taken a
packet of lettera out of a drawer in his counting house.
She reproached him about them and ran away to her
mother's. She stayed about a week, and then returned
home. They then went to Gravesend and stayed about
a week. The day after his return he found a paper in the
drawer. He showed it her, she was in a great passion,
and as he was going downstairs she smashed his hat,
over his eyes. He said he should consult his mother
and his friends. She said he should not leave the house
alive. When he returned in the evening, he said she
must leave the house. Mrs. Richardson was present,
and he desired her to witness that he used no unnecessary
force in removing her from the house. The only force
he did use was a touch on the shoulder. About ten
days or a fortnight afterwards he received a letter from
her, of the 7th August. He locked up the letter he had
found in another drawer. He missed it some time
afterwards. He made a copy of it. (The substance of
this letter was stated by Mrs. Fisher, the mother of the
respondent, in her evidence. It was addressed to "My
dear C—," and in it Mrs. Fisher said that she had
arrived in town about five o'clock. and that she regretted
she had not spent the evening as pleasantly as she had
spent the afternoon, and that she wished she had been
united to a man capable of making her happy ; and
promised 'to meet the person to whom the letter was
adressed at a specified place, and concluded by sending
him a thousand kisses.) On the 4th Dec. 1858, he was
living at Granville-place, Blackheath. She had a muff
very.much moth-eaten. She had asked him to give her
another, and he had told her he could not afford it. He
was in the Kentish Yeomanry, and had a suit of regimen-
tals. He saw them in the bath-room with the muff upon
them lying near an open window, and covered with pepper
and wet. • He told his wife it was one of her nasty
tricks. She called him a liar, and said the servant had
done it. She was very abusive, and he told her to leave
the breakfast-room. She seized two of the chairs, and
then ran round the room and screamed. He told her
not to make such a noise. She seized him by the
whiskers and tore the hair but. He then pulled her
down by the hair, as it was very painful to him. He
did not kick at her, but she kicked him and hurt him so
much that he nearly fainted, and suffered from it for
some time after. In the evening Fenner and he went
to Greenwich together.. Fenner went to his house at
half-past six. de followed him about ten. Fenner and
Mrs. Fisher were in the breakfast-room, one sitting on
each side of the fire. He could not recollect having
taken hold of the poker. Both he and Mrs. Fisher
were in a great passion, and .called each other names.
They had ceased to occupy the same room for more than
a twelvemonth. In 1851 there was a misunderstanding
about a French girl he had brought_ from Paris. A
'friend interfered and induced him to do as his wife
wished in the matter.

In cross-examination the respondent adniitted that
about. a twelvemonth ago he took Mrs. Jackson, who
kept the brothel at Greenwich, and a girl to a tavern,
and gave them brandy, and made notes of their state-
ments. About eighteen months ago he invited Becks,
who had been his groom, to dine with him at Penge.
lie found the letter to " My dear C--" in one of her
drawers, which he had opened to look for a pockethand-
kerchief.
In answer to the Judge Ordinary the respondent said
that his house at Blackheath was near the station, and
that the house of Mrs. Jackson 'at Greenwich, which
he and Fenner had visited together, was situated between
the Trafalgar and the Crown and Sceptre.
Mrs. R. Fisher, the respondent's mother, was called
to prove that her son consulted her in 1849 upon finding
his wife's letter in the drawers, and that in 18.54 Mrs.
Fisher told her she had got possession of the letter and
destroyed it. Immediately after the finding of the letter,
Mrs. Fisher said she had only written it to try and
make her husbandjealom, and bad put it in his drawer.
She admitted, in cross-examination, that she had been
for a long time on bad terms with the petitioner. The
letter found in the drawer had not been sent through
the post.
John BeckS, a groom, who was in Mr. Fisher's service
in 1857, stated that be had once gone out riding with
Mr. Fenner and Mrs. Fisher alone, and that they went
to the Seven Stars at Footscray, and stayed there for
twenty minutes or half an hour.
John Wilson who had been postboy and Ostler at the'
Seven Stars, said he had seen Mr. and.. Mrs. Fisher, and
Mr. Fenner and other persons, together there. He
only saw Mrs. Fisher and Mr: Fenner alone there on
saddle-horses once. lie had seen them there alone in a
carriage five or six times. It, was Mr. Fisher's carriage,
and sometimes Mr. Fenner drove, and sometimes the
coacnman.
Charlotte Meachard said she had seen Mrs. Fisher
and Mr. Fenner alone at the Seven Stars in December,
1859. They went into the dining-room outside the
door. Mrs. Fisher went herself into a bedroom, and
she assisted her to take off her riding drawers. She and
Mr. Fenner remained in the dining-room about three-
quarters of au hour, and then wont away again on their
horses.
Cross-examined—They took tea together, and she
waited on them and went in and out continually. Mrs.
Fisher went back o the bedroom and put on the
drawers again before she went away.
Mr. Steele, a friend of Mr. Fisher, said he once saw
Mr. Fenner and Mrs. Fisher together at Lake's dining-
rooms in the city in 1857. It was a public dining-room
on the third floor. No one was in it when he went in
but Mr. Fenner and Mrs. Fisher. Re was conversing
with her in the ordinary way.
Ann Kendal said that she had once seen Mrs. Fisher
at the brothel in Greenwich kept by Mrs. Jackson. She
came between 7 and 8 in the evening after the gas was
lighted. Mr. Fenner was with her. She showed them
into a room and left them. She did not see them go
at
owg aeyt e
rSohne
ohtanders eoeeno
asMi
orn.
sF. e eTwroaynd years
rosg.
oF Fisher
rmtlltreerhe,
she saw Mrs. Fisher again in the Commercial-road.'
Slie
illveras
cometakenotuot
of
a h
ahouse n
sue Gloucester-place,
pr
o osopposite.
and she
saw
In cross-examination the witness described the dress
which the lady had worn at Mrs. Jackson's, and said she
took particular notice of her because she thought she
knew her. ller veil was over her forehead, but not over
her eyes. She waited from 10 o'clock in the morning
till half-past 3 o'clock in the afternoon in the Commer-
eial-road before Mrs. Fisher came out of the house
opposite. In March, 1859, she was spoken to by Mrs.
Jackson about the lady she had seen with Mr. Fenner.
That was the first time she ever.mentioned it.
Mrs. Jackson said she had seen Mr. Fenner at her
house with different ladies. She did not know Mrs.
Fisher, but she had given a description of a person who
bad once gone to her house with Mr. Fennerond she
had been told it was Mrs. Fisher. She was walking in

the Commercial- road with Mr. Bowen, when she saw a
lady coming out of a house Whom she thought she
recognised. She could not say that it was or that it ,
was not the lady who had been to her house with Mr.
Fenner. It was about February, 1858, when she saw,
them at her house. She had' fetched a pint of port wine
for them. The lady had a thick fall on her face.
The mother-in-law of the last witness was also called.
to identify the lady she bad seen in the Commercial-road
as a lady who had been to the brothel with Mr. Fenner.
She saw them there six or eight months after Kendal had
16ft. '
John Bowen, who had been employed " to get up
evidence" for the respondent, said he had taken the
Jacksons and Kendal to the Commercial-road to identify
Mrs. Fisher.
Two servants whO .had lived with Mr. and Mrs.
Fisher several.years ago, were called to corroborate Mr.
Fisher'S statements as to the violence of her temper and
conduct. One of them said. that Mrs. Fisher never
seemed. happy but when she was quarreling.
irgedthaotffcbnocteh,
Mr. Serjeant Shee, in summing
parties had been guilty of every uP,
matrimonial
but that they were getting on together very well, and
would, no. doubt, have lived happily in time, if they had
not unfortunately made the acquaintance of Mr. Fenner,
who took advantage of his intimacy with the family to
aggravate their dissensions and to debauch Mrs. Fisher.
Dr. Phillirnore, in reply, remarked With great
severity upon the conduct of the "filthy miscreant," as
he called the respondent, who had for years associated
with prostitutes and treated his wife with inhuman
brutality, and who now trumped up a charge of
adultery against against her and supported it with perjury.:
He c.mtended that the charge of cruelty '-had been
fully established against the respondent, -and that
the slight evidence upon which the counter -charge of
adultery rested was. entirely untrustworthy. It was
ridiculous to imagine that Fenner would have taken
Mrs. Fisher to Fisher's own brothel if he had been car-
rying on an intrigue withiher. To all the other injuries

which Fisher had -.accumulated upon the head of his
unfortunate wife he had now added that of endeavour-
ing
to blast ,4r pharacter by slandering his own friend.
The forenan said the jury would not trouble his lord-
ship to sum up, as they had made up their minds long
ago. They found that the respondent had been guilty of
adultery and cruelty, and that the petitioner had not
been guilty of adultery.
His lordship expressed his entire concurrence in the
verdict, and pronounced a decree nisi with costs.