The Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1860-05-17 00:00:00

COURT OF DIVORCE.

THREE WEEIKS AVTER MARRIAGE.
(Before Sir. d.
Rusty v. "Rvsn.—This was a suit inifitited by the:
wife for a judicial reparation, on the ground of her'
husband's alleged cruelty. The petitioner pleaded
divers acts of ill-treatment on the part of the respondent,
which commenced about three weeks after marriage.
The respondent, in his answer, denied generally the
acts attributed to him, but admitted that he had
threatened his wife, in consequence of some gross pro-
vocation on her part, adding, however, that there was
rid grehind for her believing that her life was in danger
trot violenCe.
Kr: dhanifeets, ~ tnid Mr. C. Sturge, were
counsel IV? re petitioner; and gag fes.pondent was
unrepresenie
From the statement Oi qd" EtWilto that the
parties were married in April, iBLB, d! hictigier, the
petitioner being a wictow, possessing an anntiitY, and
having five children at the tinie., The respondent was a
taller; and lad family of four children by a previous
marriage. lie Via ice" means of his orvn, and the peti-
tioner furnished a house aii'd staked' arshoP for him in
East-street, Chichester. The acts of' ill-trear6rd con-
sisted of violent abuse, kicking the petitioner down
'stairs, threatening to "recompense" her, and' at the
same time brandishing a carving-knife close to her
person. His conduct became so outrageous that
she was compelled to leave him, and went with her
family to reside at Ptighton, where the respondent fol-
towed her, and behaved so Violently to her in the street
that she Was compelled to apply tee tlid magistrates for
protection: On that occasion, he strtitir her with a thick
walking stick, and toitthe i'n'terrei,enee ofa gentleman
Se would have proceeded to ftirtliciiioien'ee. The follow-
ing-day he was committed to Lewes gaol, nett b'ein'g able to
)13tain sureties to keep the peace, and he was detained tilde
?or a short time. The petitioner was induced to live
tgaiu it ePia rqpirdent, but be resumed his previous
reatment and oil Ms iffi'icileiNgliet with the carving
mile, she left him, and they had ;Ot.ifpee Cohabited.
The respondent was at present living at PfigiA w'h'ere
be was carrying on business, and the petitioner itptie-i
'tended that he would deprive her and her family of
property in which Ole had a reversionary interest at the
decease of her rtfather, who V 715 fttr advanced in life.
to stipPotit Of 016 yttitio, Mrs. .uAli, her 6011-in-
law, and one of hei Were etargined,
The 4spdnden't vi 4 then Mid dilted that the
reason of bk. wife',a leaeing Phiebestei
den was her &filth*
the house *herd they resided.' ~ Ike ed Mosi posi-,
tively that he'had ever the Petilieniu, as she
had described. He remembered having th one occasion
a carving, knife and a small knife in his hands, and
saying to his wife,.in his daughter's presence, that he
Would be "recompensed." In reality, he meant this
only jocularly, but at the time he wished to frighten
her. (Laughter.) He admitted that one day at Brighton
he !Joked the petitioner with his oak between her
shoUldets, When she *its walking with her daughter,
and that oft anoiher occasions lie slapped het fact. lie
admitted also, that be sthd One afternoon,
that if she did not go desri stairs Elie' could
be kicked down. He believed that from the coinVeiiee:
ment of their union the petitioner wanted to impose on
him "an iron bondage which no man could endure."
(Laughter.) lie had bad enough of wives, and he
had no dl site that, the petitioner should return to him.
(Laughter.)
No witness was called for the defence.
Mr. M. Chambers submitted that sufficient lie bier
established to prove that the petitioner was in bodily
danger from the violence of the respondent, and there-
fore she was entitled to the relief for which she prayed.
Sir C. Creswell said it was not because parties wished
to Mako.each 'other miserable as possible that the court!
was called ()tete/ interfere. 'The case required conside-
ration, for he was not satisfied that the petitioner was
in danger of actual personal harni.
Judgment was accordingly deferred.