The Express.
London, England, 1862-06-06 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
(THIS DAY.)

EQUITY COURT.
(Before the Lords Justices ofAppeel.)

RELAY P. THZ CRTSTAL PALACII DIETRICi OAR COMPANY.

This was an appeal from a decision of the Master ofshe
Rolls. The plaintiffs were the freeholders of certain
lands, being part of Raveneboarne-park, Lewisham,
on which various villa residences had been erected.
and certain roads laid out for the use of the °ma-
piers of the villas. Ravensbourne-park formerly belonged
to George Selby (through whom the plaintiffs claimed by
devise) and Underwood Pries, in undivided moieties;
and in 1830 a deed of partition was executed,
under which the roads were vested in Selby, he
covenanting with Pries, and a then purchaser dr
part of the property, that they and the occupiers
of the villas should have the same use and enjoyment
of the oocupation roads as if they were public reeds. In
July last the occupiers of some of the villas invited
the Crystal Palace District Gas Company to lay down
gas papas. This was dose without the consent of the plain-
tiffs, who accordingly filed their bill to restrain the nom-
pany from breaking up the reads for this purpose, and to
oblige them to take up the pipes spin. The Master of the
Rolls had decided that the plaintiffs were prevented by the
covenants in the deed from objecting to the occupiers hav-
ing gas laid down by the company, and on that ground had
&mimed the bill

The appeal was argued in May last. by Mr. Lloyd, Q.C.,
and Mr. A. Smith, for the plaintiffs ; and Mr. Selwyn,
Q.C., Mr. G. M. Gdfard, Q.C., Mr. Joni, Mr. Francis
Webb, and Mr. Ware, for the several defendanta.
The Lord Justice Knight Bruce was of opinion that one
or other of two courses should be adopted, i. e., either to
dismiss the appeal, or to give liberty to the plaintiffs to
bring an action, but without an injunction in the masatime.
The Lord Justice Turner held that the decree of the
Master of the Kolls should in all respects be affirmed.
The appeal was therefore dismissed, but without costa.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
(Word gar Judge Ordinary.)
GRIFFITHS V. GRIFFITHS.
- - ....

Mr. Day and Mr. Searle appeared for the petitioner.
Thi► was the petition of a wife who sought • dissolution
on the ground of her husband's adultery and cruelty. The
parties were married in 1854, and the cohabitation lasted
about three years and there had been two children, one of
which only survived. The respondent, a human, of
drunken and dissipp►►ted habits, had been guilty of several
acts of great violence to biz wife, who was ultimately
obliged to leave him on account of his misconduct. Since
then he bad been living with another wom►n.
Decree nisi with coats.

GLOVER V. GLOVER AND BLAKE.

Mr. Huddleston, Q Q., and Mr. Mereweather appeared for
the petitioner ; Mr. Turner for the co-respondent
Mr. Richard A. Glover, a 031111111116011 agent and collector
for • brewery arm. married Mary Ann Kynastoss, on the
24th of :September, 1853. After residing together till 1860
they separated, and the respondent went to live at St.
John's-wood, when she was suited by the co-respondent,
Henry Blake. A child was born of this intrigue, sod it was
registered as Henry Kyuaston Blake.
'Decree nisi with costs.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Comminioner Bram)

The bankrupt, a—mercisat, of George-yard, Lombard- r
street, applied for his certificate, under the old act. The
bankruptcy had occurred two years ago. There were fn•
quest adjournments of the examination sitting, and the
bankrupt only pared in October last. His unsecured
debts are 5,6001. • assets, 5001. or 6001.
Mr. Bagley opposed for the assignees.
The case had been adjourned from time to time, owing to
the unsatisfactory character of the accounts. The bankrupt
bad appealed to the Lords Justices, and bad been required
to furnish additional accounts, on dospg which be had
mead. The assignees complained that the conduct of
the bankrupt had been exceedingly vexatious. He had ob-
tained poseession of certain bills of lading, and appropriated
them to his own use ; he had also received about 1201.
which was doe to his estate, and had put it in his pocket.
Eventually that money had been returned to the assignees,
but they had been put to considerable expense in conse-
quence of this impaction, and submitted that the certifi.
cats ought to be suspended for some time.
Mr. Ernest Reed, for the bankrupt, explained that the
transaction relating to the bill of lading had originated in •
mistake, not in any deliberate dishonesty on the part of the
bankrupt. The monies bad been returned by the huslempt,
and accepted by the assignees, and the offence was thereby
condooed. All other features in the cam were eredltable to
the bankrupt. He had been in business forty years ;be
bad come to the court to prevent oue creditor from stme
ing off all he had cot ; he had brought into court 4CJi.
or 600&. ' • and by has exertions about 2501. had since been
obtained from the Oape. He submitted that it was a ales
for an immediate certificate.
His Honour granted an immediate certificate of the
second clam.

IN RE DAWNS AND TROUGHTON.—THE RHOZZDZITH BANE.
This was a sitting for dividend. There has already been
a dividend of about Eks. in the pound ; and the assets in
hand, it is estimated, will yield a further dividend of be-
tween 6d. and le. The precise amount will be shortly an-
nounced. The liabilities are close upon 100,000/.
Mr. Linklater appeared for the awrignese.
LV BE THE CHI:BEIM PATZNT SALT COMPANY (LIMITED).
A petition for winding-up has been presented against this
company, and stood for bearing to-day. The company was
inoorlioratecl two years ago, far workiog DOOM Mit =UM is
Chen ire. The petition is that of a creditor, and contsins
the usual allegations as to the inability of the company to
meet its engagements.
Au adjournment was taken by eaneent till Tuesday, the
17th inst.

THE POLICE COURTS.
(THIS DAY.)

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.
♦ CAB! FOR TB! LIFO/ICS COURT.

Mrs. Mary ilusAe;r7 wife Hasbeey,
pr4eirx of music, and ionnerlywith the Christy Miestrebi,
but now at Waimea Music Hai.
l was charged with wilfully
breaking a pane of glass at the house of her father-in-law.
Mr. Huberry, a master tailor, of Maud's-court, Soho, and
also with assaulting her husband.
The father-in-taw having proved the breaking of the
window,
The husband said his wife came to hisfatheishouse where
he was residing, and asked him to receive her, be having
left her in September last He refused in consequence of
something thathad occurred, telling her that he could not
think of such a thing, and that she bad better take proceed-
ings again.t him. She then caught hold of en iron bar that
fastened the window, aed pulling it out struck him a blow
on the forehead. He had letters in his possession.
Mr. Knox said he bad nothing to do with that. The
husband hail a course open to him. If he was able to prove
adultery he had better commence proceedings for a divorce.
It was the most effectual remedy, especially as there were
no children.
_ .

The wife—Look at my arm !
The husband—You did it yourself.
The wife—He has wrongly accused me.
Richard Kent, 191 C, said he saw the prisoner strike the
complainant with the iron bar produced, her husband at the
time trying to put her out of the house, but using no more
violence than necessary. He also saw the window broken
by her.
Mr. Knox said it was clearly a family dispute, and if the
husband believed she was guilty of adultery he had better
take the course be had suggested. The wife had also in the
meantime better make herself chargeable to the parish if
bar husband did not make an allowance, and then be would
be brought before him (the magistrate). She must pay the
damage or have three days' imprisonment, and be bound
over to be of good behaviour for three months, and if she
offended again he should require sureties.