The Express.
London, England, 1863-07-01 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGMC.E.

(THIS DAY.)

ARCHES COURT.
(Before Dr. Lushingtos.)
THE BISHOP OF ELT r. THE MP. JMISH O'NEILL.
This was a proceediog under the Church Discipline Acia,
conoted by the Bishop of Ely against the Rev. James
vicar of Lutoo, on. a charge of criminally essaulting
, id under sixteen, a pupil teacher, named Margaret Ellen
The rose was reported on a former on:snort,
s pleadings pleadings were before the court. To-day was
appointed for the hearing of the viva ewe mi-
aow
The..
Queens Advocate, Dr. Middleton, and Mr. Field
spelled for the Bishop of Ely ; Mr. Collier, Q.C., Dr.
Q.C., sod Mr. Prichard for the defendant, who wee
pro4ol. and who by the pleadings denied the charge.
A long legal discussion took p to which the question
was raised whether under the Evidence Act the defendant
could be exam Med.
The Queen's Advocate rid be should make no objection.
me bishop bad no vindictive feeling, but only wished the
truth to be ascertained.
Mr. Collier said the defendant was most anxious to be
called, and was in attendance for the purpose.
His lordship said he had decided in soother cue that
a defendant could not be heard, but he wee ready to hear
the point entilwl•
Mr. Collier would be ready to enter into the question, as
it was important that the defendant should be ailed.
The young woman was called and described the alleged
which she said took place in the defendant's house,
st Rlsodford, Dorset, on the 19th August, 1861. She Ent
told a fellow pupil of what had occurred, but before she did
so, the defendant had seen her, and told her not to tell
in Tope what had happened. She afterwards told her
mother, which led to the proceedings.
The witness was cross-examined by Mr. Collier.
Thome, from the witnesses to be examined, is likely to
exepy one or two days_

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)
BALE V. BALE.

Kr. Cooke for the plaintiff ; Dr. Wanthey and Yr. Day
far the defendant.
The testator in this case, Mr. Robert Bala, tram thrown
oat of his gig sad killed so long ago as the 23rd of .Ts.
glary, 1843, baron executed a will ors the 26th of
Jane, 1831, and a codicil in the vear 1838. Re was a
veterinary surgeon and farmer at Wicklewood, Norfolk. Be
left property worth about 4,0061. or 5,000/.. the bulk of
wbich be divided between his wife and Mr. Roth. Bale. jun.
In. Bale had also since died, and had left her share
to Mr. Bale. so that that gentleman was now in pas-
elision of nearly all the property. These documents
were propounded by Mrs. Emily Bale, the executrix of the
testator's executor ; mid the present suit was brought to
revoke the probate obtained nearly twenty year. ago, on
the ground that the instruments propounded had not been
signed by the testator ; that they had not been properly
executed; and that the testator was not of sound mind.
The case for the plaintiff sea abandoned at the close of the
defendant's evidence.
Sir C. Cromwell said that although there was no memo to
ramose that the testator was insane, there might became
graced fee surmising that those who opposed the will were.
ft lanes.) It wan a very scandalous proceeding altogether,
sal the plaintiff must be condemned in the costa.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Pane.)
ra RI Aim's RUSSILL.
This cue was before the court a few days ago, when the
ader of discharge was granted, but the release was ad-
mused for fresh notices to be given to the creditors.
The bankrupt was again brought up. In answer to quce-
tees from Mr. Goodday, she said she had been in custody
lowly three months.
Mr. Goodday said that there was no oppcwition ma the part
of Dr. Adams, or any creditor.
His Honor granted the release.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Goalbsarn.)
IN RR BISIZT.—REMOVAL OF ASSIGNEES.
The bankrupt was an outfitter, of Southampton. At a
lamer slitting application was made for the removal of the
gHis Itosiour now gave judgment. One of the assignees,
ie said, was a creditor for 41. 3a., and the other for 30i.
old. They had been chases, to the exclusion of the sub-
stantial creditors, and had left everything to the attorney of
as bankrupt, Mr. MarJiie.
His Honour made an order for the removal of the assignee.
Mr. William Stricken, of Cornhill, wu for the petitioner ;
Mr. Sargood on the other side.

THE POLICE COURTS.
(THIS DAY.)

CLERKE4ZWELL
TIM SOCIAL ITIL of 001717.

Two young miUs,wh;gavethe naniesZir Ridiardsois sad
Brown, were charged, the former with seasoning a young
woman of the name of Giles, in Bidborough-street, St.
Pancras, and the latter with attempting to rams Richard-
son from the custody of the police.
From the evidence of the complainant it appeared that
she was serving at the house rn Bidhorourh-street, sal
that on the previous afternoon the fintonamed prieoner
knocked at her master's door, made ■ disturbance, and
wished to force his way in. She endeavoured to prevent
kiln,' and he then struck her in the face and three Umee on
the neck. She gave him into custody, and no the way to
the station Brown; attempted to push him away from the
creatable.

The prieocer Richardsoo said be wee passing the booms
le question, which is situated neat door to the entrance to a
chapel, when he ems two women halt naked sitting at the
parlour window, and they beckoned him to go up. He did
so, and after some conversation a disturbance took place, but
be did net etrike any woman.
The other prisoner said be wee drank, and did not know
what he was about.
_

iii.fieri;reaVed the witness if the defence was true,
sad what sort of a house it wee? _

Witame—lt sa a quiet house, and my master and mistress
are milliners, bot I never see any work dose or anything
wrong, 1 ma sewers you. There wee only one "Young
lady "is the house, sad she had on a low drew, and that
me, perhaps, what the prisoner meant by saying the females
were h►ll-naked. There was scything wrong done at
the house she would most solemnly wore the maguarate.
Mr. Alexander (second clerk)—But you have several
young women lodging there, have you not come, tell the
truth about it.

Witnees•—There ere lobe "young ladies" lodging there
who are visited by their friends, but I never saw anything
wrong.

Mr.„ Alexander—And the " friends " you speak of are
principally men!
Witness—Oh, ye., they are " gentlemen ;" low people
do not come to our house.

A etylishlpdressed woman pt into the box, maid her
name wu Edwards, and that she resided in the house in
gutation. s

Barker—What are you?
Witness—l do nothing. lam a "kept lady."
Yr. Barker—What do you mean by that'
Witness—l am under the" protection"of a " gentleman,"
who keeps ma. and provides for me. Witness saw the as-
mutt, sad so did her '• lady friend." They were both at
the window when the prisoners passed.
The " lady friend" was rolled. and described herself as a
"miss," and stated she mil under the protection of a
"gentleman," and was not ashamed to own it. dhe saw
the assault.