The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1886-04-06 00:00:00

CURIOUS DIVORCE CASE.

In the Divorce Division no Hawnlay the osivit
remarkable case .1 Butler v. Butler wa• heart by 'sir.
Justice Butt. W,ll.aui lons,. Ituni Butler, clerk
in the Ordnanee Survey Oltlee :at Southampton,
Nought for a divorce by reasou ..1 the miscowleict of
his wife with the co.rosii lent.
Both the petitioner ail I tile i.e.', indent being under
age, they amietrwl by their parents An guardians.
The responifeeit, in her 111..011.1 connivance.
cruelty, and de...01i0...al the is let of her hushand.
In lita.l the petitioner mail« the saptaiiitistre Minn
May, who became int, by hill., 311.1 at the wink i 1
both parents they were inarriiel on the itrd Sep-
tember of that year. Al. that tisne :lie petitioner wan
IS year. of And ill.• reap indent only 15. Ifs then
only mulled lit, a week ; awl Mn.. Ntiy, the mother
id tilt, respondent, Agreed thwt they should live at her
11../11, awl that lw should pay Is. a week for his
hoard and lodizing. I hsiiiites arose between them, owl
ultimately Mr. limier left the house, and .dlowed
his wife Ks. a week. Subsequently some sue.
pieions aroused An V. her combiek anal on I nip
OCCAIIIOII she Wan found to have miss; inducted herself
in some stable.. with the co.respondenr, a. etable boy,
who was called in support of the petitioneer case. It
was elicited in the course of the CAM that a deed had
been drawn up between the parties to the effect that
they would not molest ar annoy PACII other. For the
defence. .kmelia limier, the resisindent,
deposed that after the marriiige her husband trentwl
her unkindly. He struck her iiism two or three
occasions. 11w.. not true that she ever iniationducted
herself with Shergolil. Hal never hewn inside the
stables. .tliont a month after the child was born her
husband left her. Corroborative evidence was given
of the cruelty. Mr. Justice Hutt found fur the
piditioner, awl granted bitti • deere• niai•

_
MiAINST THE' (I. W. It.
IMPAN Y.

At thr Cininty Court ..0 latur.lay, before
his ILmour Judge Cellists!, Richard lbsylee awl
Thomas Lye, butchers, 33, New Orchard•street,
sued the (I.W.R. Company for Ca 10s., the value of
five carcases of New Zealand mutton, eiinsimpsi
their care for transit (nen From., to Bath, and said
to bate been damaged and rendered unsaleable. Mr.
F. A. 11111, of !lath, appeared for the plaintiffs, and
Mr. P. W. Cruttwell, of Frans, for the Company.
The facts of the cane are there —On the 2nd of
February last the plaintiffs inirchased the mutton in
London, at the Central Iteat Market. It waa then
in • frozen condition according to the primes*, and
node still. It MIA taken the mune day to Bath,
by the oonspeny'e line, and midday we. taken in a
;rap, covered over, to Frome market, but was not
014,n4 the .ame day we. pieced in the company's ,
care, was taken II) tilil 014 n 6411 ti Prouie railway
et' ',we, Ili Veil into thu heads of the compaity't icr.
%ants, 'cud taken on to Ifelkalmin, where rip the 4th
Yehrpary plaintiffseahl they found it.laniii Mid dirty,
and on.4leahle. and they relined to take it. and threw
It on the nonipawye band.. The .tationinuter, Mr.
A. Matthew., .iileiryientiy tried co „,en
and euceesiled at hen in pitting a poralirwer in a Mr,
fleneock, for lAN, liana. the action. There were
o,onc twenty witnesses for the 0,1111.1111 Y, who all
were prepared In testify that when the meat wino,
Into the hands at Flown it wan damp, limp, and
.tank, 4.• lunch ie., that wen, the %%nem°. .401
they had to hold their 'plow. The plaintiffc had no
witn....ei to oipport their caw. When the. Judy. had
I heard shout half a.lown .if the temipeity men ant.,
who all tertifiell to the had condition of the meat, he
4.1.1.1 0., caw, and IMO the evidence was i.ver•
whelmine waited the plaintiff., and the 13e, 44,
Into I.y the il,,fentleni• we. in fact, a little
I iwith. ,lielpolent for defendant., with cow..