The Express.
London, England, 1863-12-02 00:00:00

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.

Dnc. I
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)

Lady Thomas Charles Pelham Clinton (who had filed a
petition tor a judicial separation on account of her husband's
adultery with a person with whom he was said to be living
at Dieppe) moved in person for an allotment of alimony.
She stated that her brother-io•law (the Duke of Newcastle)
had guaranteed her husband an allowance of 4001. a year
during his grace's life; and that she was at peanut
wholly destitute, being entirely &Toadied upon charity.
Dr. Wambev, on the other aide, said that Lord Thomas
Clinton bad no claim upon the Duke of Newcastle whatever
—the 4001. being a voluntary payment which his grace
marls to him because his father hod not left sufficient pm-
Keel property to pay the legacy which ha (the late dub)
had left ban. He submitted, therefore, that Lard Thomas
was not liable for alimony at aIL
Lady Clinton replied that she bad a letter in her posses-
', sion from the Duke of Newcastle informing her that he
would continue the payment of the allowance.
Sir J. Wilde thought he ought Dot to refuse the applica-
tion, and awarded Lady Clinks 801. a year during the
payment of the allowance.

YUMAN T. TEATIIAIf.
This was a petition for a disown filed by Mr. Yeatman, •
barrister, against his wife, for adultery alleged to have been
committed in Germany with • person who was styled the
Priam of Hohenkihe. At the trial the jury found that the
adultery was not proved, and that the petitioner had him.
self wilfully deserted the respondendent. Mr. Yeatmau
them applied to the court for • new trial, and Su Jams
Wilde granted him • rule nisi.
Mr. 7AI-slake, Q.C., and Mr. Staveley Hill now showed
mums against the rule.
Mr. Yeatman (in person) addressed the court in favour of
the new trial.

Sir J. Wilde did not think it necessary to discus the
Question of duet tioo, the vole matter to be determined
in the first instance being the adultery. On that point the
learned judge (Sir C. Creaswell) appeared to have afforded
the petitioner every assistance in his power. Bet the cue
was one in which a wife bad no safe (roma bat the opining,
the jury might form of the demeanour of the vitamins, sad
a new trial was now asked for merely became the result
bad been in favour of the reepoudeat. A verdict guild
not to be disturbed soles@ the court could see pretty csarly
that the jury bad game astray. In this cue be (Sir J.
Wilds) could sot see that they bad done so. No doubt
there had been evideeee se win d% they might, if they had
pleased, have fined adultery, but it had not been without
inconsistencies and diacrepeocies. A jury was, after all,
the best judge of the credibility of testimony ; and, at all
events, it had seen the 'vitamins in this caae, sad be (Sir
Janes) had not. He thought it would be • great hard-
ship on the wife to grant a new trial, and the rule must
therefore be discharged.
SHERIFFS' COURT.—Dze. 1.
(Before Mr. Kerr.)

CLEMENTS T. CALDRIL -THE IMRE Oi FOOT PASSENGERS

TO CROOB 71111 LOAD.

Tbis wu as sationtorejov ercom tion for damage to
a lamp, under circumstances of considerable importance to
the public.

I)lLltiffsaid that between three and four o'clock on •
certain afternoon be was priming from Blackfrian-read into
Fleetmtreet with a rank of vehicles. At the Sunday Tines
othee there was a cab standing, and u the line went on de-
fendant and three more gentlemen crossed the road. De-
fendant pushed plaintiff's hone, and tt swerved round, the
result being • breakage of the lamp.
Defendant—lt was not so. The facts are these. Iwm
at the crossing, and could not paas over in consequence of the
closeiwee of plai tiffs horse to the vehicle before lum. I did only
what I was obliged to do, and what I contesd I was justified
in doing. I put out my arm and quietly moved the horse's
bead. I bed safely crossed when the lamp was broken.
Plaintiff—That might be so, but it was the result of
your act.
Hie ilimonr—lf you were so close to the man before you,
I am inclined to boll that yon contributed to the accident.
Plutotati—Bat we are obliged to keep close. The police
authorities compel us to do so. If 1 were not to keep clone
at inch a busy time, I should have my vehicle aumehed.
There is the crossing for the public.
Defendant—Aid you were upon it.
Plaintiff—l was over it.

iffilioooor-:-17;;I;o1;lo right to be so close to the me
bide before you. The public are not to have broken limbs he-
caws the police make you keep clam. I shall hold that II
is segligewos, notwithstaodiog the polies. Every one who
has a hone or a donkey, faocim he he. a right to drive the
whole world before him, but I shall hold that whether ft
be a carriage aid four or • «sternness''s banow the public
are "wed to prosodies, sad that
_yes are sot entitled to
be so close to the vehicle before you. I shall hod here that dr
feodaat Lea oot been guilty of negligence, and therefore he
will have a verdict.
Verdict for the defemloot.

The King of Primaie addreseee his generals in
Berlin one day, and his words are In pint in London the next.
The latest Improvements on magmatic notion have rendered this
and many other mune undeviating. Vor liaatausaxe, Herring's
Magnetic Banshee : in reatorin z gray hair to Its nattiest colour,
and La eradicating the agony of tic doloreux and nervous head-
aelac—N.B. Counterfeits are being made —Waves, 3L Raging.
laßfast, Les doia,--(Advertisecatnt.J