The Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1861-01-23 00:00:00

‘`,TOl :('/) 1".1, ,k4:'itr. Y,ll MI girl'
THE DAILY TIMES, WEENESDAY7I-AN-UARY--23,----186.17--

THE ELOPEMENT OF MRSi URN
• ' WITH HER FOOTMAN.

cpur,T OF PROnATE • AnD DIVORCE—YEsTEr.DAY.

GURNEY V. GURNEY AND TATLDIt.

'this was a snit instituted by Mr. John Henry Gurney,
owe of the taemhers of the celebrated banking firm of
dui*: affd C.d., at. Norwich anti other places in the
county of NOff(tlk, Nfrarn'st Mary Cherry Gurney, his
Wife, for a criisohilit',hoittiir girtiage by fta.scd of her
adultery with the co-respotidedf TaPois: BOth
th,e,respondents had appeared to the snit; aina' illiattetl
a denial to the adultery.
• ,The Solicitor• General, with Dr. Waddilove and Mr.
Couch appeared for the petitioner; and Mr. Manisty,
Q.C., and Dr. Spinks for Mrs. Gurney; the co.
respondent Taylor was not represented.
:The Solicitor-General, in stating the case on the part.
of the petitioner, stated that Mr. John Henry Gurney
via? a gettferftati of wealth and station ; he was a mem-
ber of the &Mot OettneS, and'Co,, bankers at Norwich,
and elsewhere in the Coi'n'ty of llotfolk. ' He was also
member of parliament for King's and he sought
a dissolution of his marriage with hi'd 1/44,e,- Mary
Cherry Gurney, by reason of her adultery •iith
the co-respondent. Mrs. Gurney was the daughter
. of Richard Ilanbury Gurney, her father being cousin, to
Gurney. The marriage took place on the 15th June,
iB'46; Eft the church of All Souls, Marylebone, with
full knowledge; cotsent, and in the presence of their
families. At the time of the marriage Mr. Gurney was
between 26 and 27 years of age; Ufillirs. Ourney between
16 and 17. Of the issue of the marriage tfiffe tte:e two.
sons living, one about twelve years of age, and the other
five. At the time of the marriage both parents" of Mrs.
Gurney were living; her mother died some time after.
By the death of her father, Richard HanbUry
Gurney, in 1657, Mrs. Gurney came into a large
fortune in her own right, and for life. William
Taylor, the ce-respondent, was a footman 'in the
sertiee 'of Mr. thirney, and had accompanied them
on a' tour through the Isle of Wight; bat from some
suspicion' of his. conduct in the month of November,
1869, Mr. Gurney dismissed him from his service, in
which he had continued two or three years. Taylor,
although only a footman, was the son of a respectable
farmer, and had received a respectable cdtication., From
the time of the marriage until November, 1889, Mr.
and Mrs. Gurney had lived happily together. No
particular cause was assigned for her alteration in
manner towards her husband. • After the dismissal
of Taylor, Mr. and Mrs. Gurney continued to reside
at Calton Hall until the 12th of December, when they
returned to town, and went to reside at Kensington
Palace-gardens. On the• following morning, the 13th ,
December, it was found that Mrs. Gurney had quitted
her home, to which she never returned, and had
consorted with the co-respondent, Taylor. On the even-
ing of Mrs. Gurney's leaving her 'home (the 13th of
December), a letter was found in the letter-box directed
to Mr. Gurney, in the handwriting of his wife, which
was dated 'from 216, Marylebone-road, where she was
afterwards discovered living With Taylor. The follow-
ing is the tenor of the letter :

" Poor fellow,—l have indeed left you for ever. You
know nay heart has long been another's, and therefore it
is impossible we could live together.

" Your miserable wife, ,
" I pray God to forgive me, and that he will protect
you and my poor children through life. Send my luggage
and books to Marylebonc-road."

On receipt of this letter, Mr. Gurney immediately
consulted his solicitor (Mr. Sharp), with a view at
once to commence proceedings, when it was thought
necessary to, obtain some person to see the parties
with a view to their identity` for ulterior purposes,
and accordingly Mr. Simpson, from the office of Mr.
Field, the detective, was employed. He went, accom-•
panied by the under-butler (Mayhew) and Mr. SharP,'
to 216, Marylebone-road, where Mr. Sharp asked for
Mrs. Gurney, upon which they were shown into the front
room, where they found Mrs. Gurney. She was imme-
diately identified by Mayhew, as was also his fellow-
servant Taylor; it was then ascertained that the lodgings
had been taken by Taylor of Mrs. Donsworthy, who was•
a relative of Taylor's. She occupied the ground floor,
which consisted of a front room, a small room behind, and
a back bedroom, in which was a little bed, made up only
large enough for one, in which Mrs. Gurney slept, Taylor
occupying a small bed at the top of the house ; but
during the day they were always togethei, and took
their meals together. They were afterwards traced to
the Ship Hotel, at Folkestone, residing together, and
from thence to Boulogne, and ultimately to the Hotel
de Louvre, in Paris, where they occupied the same
apartments, and where they were again identified by
John Whiteley; another servant of Mr. Gurney's, and
Mr. Simpson, where the citation was served on them by
a clerk from Mr. Sharp's office.
Evidence having been given of the marriage and of
the adultery, which pioved the petitioner's case, •
Mr. ,Mamsty, on the part of the wife, said that he
could not resist the evidence.

The learned judge pronounced a degree nisi for a
dissolution of the marriage.
The Solicitor-General asked that the degree should
be suspended, to give an opportunity for an appliOation
as to Mrs. Gurney's settlement.
Sir C. Cresswell said that the power which the act of
parliament gave him over the wife's property was a
most embarrassing one, for he had no practice to guide
his decisions. He was, in fact, embarking upon a sea
without chart or compass, nor had the petitioner done
much to assist him. It appeared to him that the hus-
band's property would be a material element in forming
a judgment. If a husband had £l,OOO a year, and a.
wife £lO,OOO, it would be reasonable that the wife
should make some prOilsion for the children. lithe
wife had £l,OOO, and the husband £lO,OOO, it would
not be reasonable. If both had £lO,OOO, what would
be the case then ?

After some further conversation the case was then
adjourned.

THE DUKE OF CUMBERLAND'S

SUCCESSOR.

RYVES V. THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL.
At the sitting of the court,
- Sir C. CieSsWell said he had received acommunication
from the clergyman at Liverpool at whose church the
petitioner alleged that she had been baptised, and he
Was sorry to add that the rev. gentleman declined to
part with the register-book even for a single hour. Be
could not say he was not justified in that course, but
.the
rev. gentleman was willing to come to town if he were
sabpcenaed.

Mrs. Ryves said she should be happy to procure the
rev, gentleman's attendance in the way suggested ; and
she would feel much obliged if his lordship would fix a
time for the further hearing of the case. ,
Sir C. Cresswell, intimated that his learned brethren
would be able to attend again on Thursday. The only
difficulty would be in sending down the subpcena.
Mr. Hall, a solicitor, who was present, said he should
be happy to transmit the subpoena to his agent in
Liverpool.
Mrs. Ryies helieved that Mr. Bayford would send it
for her; but if he could not, she would gladly avail her-
self of Mr. Hall's kind offer.
The ease was then adjourned till Thursday (to-morrow).

ALLEGED FORGERY BY A SHEFFIELD

MANUFACTURER.

John Nicholson, cutlery manufacturer, Allen-street,
Sheffield, was charged at Sheffield on Monday, with
uttering a forged aceeptance for £3l 15s. on the previous
Monday. The prisoner, who is a partner in the firm of
Nicholson and Brown, presented a bill of exchange to
be discounted at the Sheffield and 'Rotherham Bank.
The bill was drawn on the firm of Nicholson and
,Brown, at three months, and purported to be accepted
by Matthew Henry Nicholson, cutlery manufacturer,
'Meadow Works. Mr. Chambers, the cashier, to •tvhom
the bill was presented, chewed it to Mr. Brown, tpe
manager, and the prisoner was requested to call again
on the following day. Inquiry was made of Mr. N.
H. Nicholson, who denied having given his acceptance
to the bill. The prisoner was informed of this circum-
stance on presenting himself at the bank on the follow-
ing day. Prisoner then said himself, partner, and four
others had become sureties to a money club, that an
execution had been levied, and that the bill was drawn
'in order to raise money to pay off the execution. He
offered to go to Mr. Nicholson, and Mr. Goodall, one of
the clerks at the bank, accompanied him. He admitted
not having obtained 'Mr. M. H. Nicholson's signature,
saying he bad got a young man to write the acceptance
for him ; and offered to give Mr. M. H. Nicholson a
guarantee for the amount if he would assist him at the.
bank. Mr. M. H. Nicholson replied that he could not
be an accomplice in any such matter, and the prisoner
was therefore, on his return to the bank, given in.
charge. In cross-examination it was elicited that pri-
soner and his partner were executing an order to the
amount of £8 foe Mr. M. H. Nicholson. The ptisoner
was committed for trial at the assizes. Mr. Chambers,
who appeared on his behalf, applied that he might he
admitted to bail. The Mayor agreed to grant bail on
recognisances to the amount of £lOO, with two sureties
of £5O each.

BULLION AND Corrox TABLES.—A useful and
elaborate table has just been issued by Mr. Samuel
Mendel, of Manchester, showing the amounts of bullion
in the Banks of England and France during each month
Of the past eight years, together with the fluctuations in
the Bank of England rate of discount, consols, cotton,
yarn, and cloth. From this it appears that the average
of bullion in the Bank of England was £14,220,083,
which is 42,446,620 in excess of the total in tlieJastr,
return. Our stock, therefore, is now about 17 per cent.
below the average from 1863 to 1860. The amount
held by the Bank of France, on the contrary, is not
below the average of that period. The average , was
alsout £13,800,000, and the last return was £13,980,900.
The difficulty which that establishment has to meet
evidently consists almost entirely in changing its silver
for gold. The average price of consols has been a
fraction under 94 (93 15-16), and the market is now 21
per cent. below that point. The average rate of discount
was 4 9-16, and the average price of cotton (Middling
fair Orleans) was 7d. The highest year for the latter
was 1857, when 94d. was touched, and the lowest 1855,
when it went to 6id.). •