The Express.
London, England, 1863-06-08 00:00:00

SLITROPOLITttri COUNTY COURTS.

Sitting dajs appointed foethi present went.
ernincoosna, 88 Martherlana.—Monday, June 8; Tuesday
9 ; Wednesday, 10: Thursday, 11
BI.OOIIIIIOIT, Portland.rand.—Wedneeday, June 10: Thursday,
11 . lerklay, 12.
Its 11M111, Whitehead's-grove —Tueeday, June 9: Wednesday,
10.

--.BRIATTORD.-11tursday, June 11.
Cr.aaraWlLL Daneau.terracs.—Toeaday, June 9 ; Wednes-
day, 1., laiday, 11.
itabraidrred, Oldstreer.road. Tuesday, Jane 9 . Thurs-
day, 11-
Dow, Bow-med.—Friday, June 12.
Wrindorisrsb, Great Preseotbstreet.—Wedneaday, June 10 ;
Thursday. 11.
SOUTHWARK, Bvran-irtreet.—Youday, June 8; Thursday. 11 :
IhWay, 1Y
LAMBKIN, Camberwell.new-read.—Tuaeday, JIM 9.
ORAIRWICY —Wedntoday, June 10.
WOOL* tea. —Thursday, June 11.
WANDSWURTH, Boulhstreet. —Thursday, June 11.
*lr2 or LONDON, Guildhall-buildings—Thursday, June 11.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
JUNE 6.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)

ATKINSON V. ATKINSON, MANN, BULMES, AND STICKNIT.
Mr. Shepherd and Mr. Searle for the petitioner.
Thomas Atkinson, of Selby, master and part owner of •
small vessel, married Sarah Daniel on the 181.11 Kay, 1848, and
cohabited with her till February, 1862, they having had one
child during that interval. Her habits had latterly been • ery
intemperate, and the adultery complained of had been com-
mitted during the absence of her husband at sea The co-
respondent, Frederick Mann, was the son of a lady of some
little property in the neighbourhood ; Thomas Balmer was
a painter, and George Stickney a blacksmith. The respon-
dent was charged in her husband's presence with her in-
trigue with the two last by Joseph Atkinson, her husband's
brother, who exhorted her to tell the truth and shame the
1 devil. She then admitted that they bad spent the night
with her. Joseph Atkinson said that the petitioner had
behaved well to her, for be gave her plenty of money, and
never beat her except when she got drunk. (A laugh.)
Mrs. Mann. the widow of &lieutenant who lived nextdoor
to the respondent, stated that in May, 1861, she told witness
that her husband had given her • large sum of money to
put in the bank, but that she had not been able to do so
because the establishment had closed. She, therefore, beg-
ged witness to let her son (aged 27) sleep in the house to
protect her. After a great deal of persuasion she allowed
him to go twice. On the second morning she charged both
of them with having slept together, but he denied it. A
month afterwards, however, her son Frederick confessed
that he had been guilty of the misconduct she had imputed
to him.
There was some contradictory evidence as against Stick-
sekir C. Creeswell found the charges proved against the re-
spondent, and made a decree nisi, condemning Mann and
Stickney in the meta.

THE POLICE COURTS.
ROW-STREET.
Richard Hunter, who had been employed as an attendant
at Drury-lane Theatre, was charged with stealing a gentle-
man's coat, containing various articles valued at 81., which
had been left by the owner for a few minutes on one of the
stall seats dunug the performance. The coat had been
pawned, and a cigar case in one of the pockets had been
sold by the pnaoner to Thomas Pearce, clerk at an opera
ticket-office for 4/1.6d. The prisoner admitted the robbery,
and was remanded for further examinatioo.
MARLBOROUGH-STREET.
Julius Lewy, a Prussian, was charged with dealing money
and valuables to the amount of 2601., the property of a
Frenchman named Victor Deothinia, at the Hotel Conte,
Goldenequare.
The property was stolen during the night from the owner's
room, and was found in the prisoner's room, he having left
the hotel in the middle of the night, without paying his
bill. A letter was found upon the prisoner, stating he had
destmyed himself.
Rose, a Brighton pawnbroker, produced a watch and
chain pawned by the prisoner at his shop, which were iden-
tified by the prosecutor.
The prisoner was committed far
SOUTHWARK.
Louisa Gifford, alias Ovine, was charged, on farther exa-
mination, with being connected with a man not in custody in
stealing • leather bag containing watches and jewellery
worth nearly 1,0001., from the North Kent Railway termi-
nus, London-bridge, the property of Mr. Solomon Reuben.
The prosecutor, • traveller, on the 4th of May last arrived
at the Loodoo-bridge terminus, to commence a journey.
He set his bag down while he went for a ticket, and on re-
turning for the bag he missed it, and had never since been
able to find it. He did not recollect having ever before
menthe prisoner.
William Bill/4 a police constable, apprehended the pri-
soner, with a man named Gifford. on the 4th of May last,
on a charge of having four sets of earrings in their posses-
sion unlawfully obtained, but the charge amid sot be sub-
stantiated, and they were liberated. Two days afterwards
he beard of this robbery of jewellery, and the earrings were
identified by Mr. Reuben se his property. He then went to
where the prisoner resided, and found a box containing
some of the stolen articles. The prisoner said the property
belonged to her husband, the man who was before taken up on
auepicion, though at that time they both denied any know-
ledge of each other.
Evidence was then given that the prisoner had resided in
lodgings with the man Gifford as bin wife that they had
given • set of earrings to the landlady, and that the prisoner
was not the wife of Gifford, but of a person named Orme,
who lived at Bristol. A letter hsd been received from Orme
stating that she had left his house in company with Gifford,
and had robbed him to a oonsiderable extent ; and that
Gifford was a well-known thief, who hail already suffered
four years' penal servitude.
Mr. Combe said it would be necessary to have better
evidence as to the fact that the prisoner was not the wife
of Gifford, and also as to the manner in which she was con-
nected with the robbery.
She was then remanded to a future day.