The Express.
London, England, 1864-03-04 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE

(THU DAY.)

EQUITY COURT.
(Bolas NriorCbiuteollor Wood.l
ItLerf o. TSB MDTDOPOLITAI BOARD Or Wollys.
This was • motion to twitrain the defendants from con-
tinning their works in front of Milford Wharf, on the banks
of the Thames, until ormiperwation wee awarded to the
plaintiff. The case arose out of the Thames Embankment,
it appearing that the defendants bad recently drawn up
barges in front of the plaintiff's wharf, and commenced dis-
charging chalk, stones, and rubbish into the river, io order
to commence the formation of the embankment. The plain-
tiff (misted that they had no right to take this course until
provisions for compensation were made, inmemtich as it
unmated to a direct interference with his property.
Mr. Osborne and Mr. Youtifax were foe the plaintiff ;
and Mr. Kolt, Sir H. Cairns, and Mr. C. Hall were on the
other aide.
The Pone-Chanoallor, after going into an osoulioa.
Lion of tho ma and of the seta affecting the
question, said that there appeared here to be no
trespass whatever upon the Plaintiff's land, nor any
act dons which prevented his going again and using it.
And in such cent alone should should au injunction go.
There would be damage, no doubt, bat that was a question
to be considered hereafter. He mart refuse the motion.
1 Caste to be coda in the cause.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
(More the Jodie Ordinary.)
_ _ .

WODITIOVOI o. WODEBOORE AND FARROW DAM-up 1
Mr. Serjeant Baßantam and Dr. Sera:ray for the petitioner;
Mr. &trisect Perry and Dr. Tristram for the respondent;
Dr. Spinks for the executors of the cereepoodest.
The petitioner, William Wodehoure, was the agent at
Norwich of a Liverpool insurance office (the Liver) ; but
in 1855, wheal he married the respondent, he was a jou
neyman in the employment of • miller named Tebseham,
at the little Norfolk village of Needham. Her same wan
Elizabeth Pardon ; she bad previously Mee in service of the
late Mr. Beejamin Farrow, • fanners* Needham, where be
was also the priori* landed propnetor. It wee stated
that he had as income of 2,000/. or 3,000/. a year. The
petitioner and his wife had at first kept • little grime'
shop at Needham ; but, ia July, I°s7' the petitiour re
moved to Norwich, sad he had not lived with her smog ;
but evidence was gives to show that he invited her to come
to him as won se he had settled in that city ; and that she
had reined to renew the cohabitation. There had been tao
children, of whom, however, ouly one 'arrived.
Berths Elizabeth Bales said she was the wife of a shoe-
maker at Norwich, When she was three years of age she
was sent to the house of Mr. Farrow, who wee the executor
of his father. She afterwards became wryest to him, and
the respondent wee also there with witness. Considered
the 000 duct of the cereepoodeat to Mrs. Wodehoune more
like that of • husband than that of • mister. Had observed
improper familiarities between them. In July, 1852, the
respondent was ill, and Mr. Farrow need ti come into the
room where she slept with witness. He would help the
respondent out of bed, take bet on his lap and my, •• let
me feel your side where it burls you, Sway." That would
happen two or three time" in a night. He would also have
her down into his room in her night-dress with only some-
thing on bee shoulders. After Mr. Wodehoose had left
Muodham the respondent frequently came to Mr. Farrow's.
Had again seen improper familiarities pass bateaux them.
Cromexamioed—Was so diegneted at the conduct of
the respondents that wittier" requested to have
a separate room ; and had one given her. Respondent
seed to pretend that she wee going to have a fit when he
came ; but she never had one when he was not sear. She
used to pull her hair and cry out, "I am going to faint."
Or she would call out. " Give me some of Sir's pudding," or
" Sir's cheese," meaning her master's. Witness had to go
and fetch it for her. Sometimes whams would cut it
for her, but sometimes she would brigs it, and the co-re
spondeut would cut it for her himeelL Had fetched her
podding herself half • dozen times, besides cheese. It was
plum pudding. The respondent went to the mister's study
almost every day while she wee ill. Supposed that
she dined with him. No plate was laid for her,
but it use likely enough that he fed her. (A
laugh.) Witness's mother was at the house tor
the Warm of waiting on the respondent while
she was iIL She was present when the co-recioodent took
the respondent in his lap. Witness's mother was in the
house about eight or nine weeks. Witness had herself had
the misfortune to have an illegitimate child while she was
at Mr. Farrow's. Was dimesed by Mr. Farrow in muse
queue° of that, and be took in her place another person who
was confined in the boom He afterwards pretended to
forgive witness, and had her back ; but be wee always
wrangling at witness oc account of her misfortune. Would
swear that she had not had another illegitimate child.
Never. Was honourably married on the 27th of May,
1602, and was not at that time in the family.way. Was
aware that Mr. Farrow bad left witness something and bad
afterwards struck it out of his will. That was because he
did not approve of witsees's marriage.
Reexamined—Had always been in expectation of a
legacy from Mr. Farrow, but had newel' received it. Wit-
neee's mother had married • farm lebourer of the name of
fitting, who occupied • bones belonging to Mr. Farrow.
Be the Judge—Mr. Farrow wee not the father of wit-
nern's child.
Henry Yellop, another servant of Mr. Farrow, and
brotber-in-law to the last witness, deposed to seeing the
I respondents together in a barn under circumstances which
I left no doubt se to their guilt. Had peeped at them through
some holes which had been left in the wall for the purpose
of admitting light and air. The boles were six or seven
feet high, but there was semi of moulding at the bottom of
the wall on which he could rest his feet.
Some other witnesses were also examined for the purpose
of more or less oorrobonitiog the above witnesses.
Mr. Nichols! • surgeon, had been consulted by Mr.
Farrow reepecting a servant who was ill. He made • coat-
oranioatios to witness.
Sir J. Wilde ruled that the cercepoodut being dead, this
oommosiciation weld not be given in evidence.
Mr. Nicho:s sated that he had been led to believe that
the girl had a tumour in her side; but on examining her he
found that there was nothing the niatter—she was may
suffering from hysteria, stud he prescribed for her ac-
cordingly.
This was the petitioner's men
Mr. fierjeut Parry called no the jury to discredit the
evidence of the two principalleritoupee, Berilt.llßalee and her
brother-in-law, Yellop, whelk was in the last degree incredible.
The pram woman was evidently under the influence of a
moat magligoant feeling. both towards Mr. Farrow
and the respondent; nor was the testimony of Yellop
in any respect more trustworthy. The respondent
having been deserted by her husband since 1657, had
not the slightest interest in defending the suit except for
the purpose of clearing bar character. Kr. Farrow was
beyond the reach of pleader. At the time of his death he
was 77 Tears of age, and it had been his custom to relieve his
poor neighbours with mediae' aid and other almedeade.
There was not the slightest reason to behove that scything
had ever paned between him and the respondent boyar]
what might lawfully pass between • benerolmt master and
his sick servant, or between a wealthy landlord and his poor
tempt.
Elizabeth Pubis, mother of the ruse n lent, raid that
her daughter wee now about 26 years of age, and that she
was 16 when she went into Mr. Farroir's service. lo 1552
she bad a bad illness, and she had at last left in cone&
queens of her health. Sue lived at home after that
till she was put 'prune* to • dressmaker. She
subsequently did a great deal of needlework for
Mr. Farrow and his household. The petitioner left her
on account of a quarrel he bad with her respecting
the key of a bureau in which the money was kept. With
one or two exoeptions, be had sent her no money. She
afterwards assisted witness sod her mother to keep • shop,
and the had to go from time to time to Mr. Farrow's on
busbies. Had seen the slightest impropriety between
Mr. Farrow and her She very rarely went into her room
while she was ill in his service.
Cromesareined—Had never heard of any mnemonics from
the petitioner that his wife should to hes with him.
Amelia Veriest, housekeeper togo lMr. Farrow, proved that
when the respondent COD. to the house oo business she
saw witness, and not Mr. Farrow. Had never sew Mr.
Farrow in the slightest degree misconduct himself to her.
Knew the girl Bertha quite well. She never made any
complaint to witness about lf re. Wodehouse's behaviour.
Would not believe Bertha on her oath. She was dismissed
the second time in consequence of a falsehood she had told
Mr. Farrow. She told witness that the reason she was
going to be married was because she was in the family way.
[The can was proceeding when our report left.]

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. CommiroicoseGoulbura.)
ni ax PIZZT. -A CLIIICAL ISPECCLATOIL
This wan the adjourned sitting for examination and dig.
charge. The bankrupt, who is a clergyman of the church
of Basked, was described an a schoolmaster, of Liverpool,
and elsewhere. The total liabilities are 19,9501., of which
11,5001. ere due to unsecured creditors.
Mr. Sargood opposed for the amalgams ; Hr. Begley imp-
Forted.
The bankrupt, when examined, gave the following ex-
traordinary aocount of his weer M Liverpool. He said
that he had been io orders about twelve years. Shortly after
his ordination be went to Liverpool, in 1853, as sristaat
curate to the Rey. Dr. M'Neile. He had previously
hold a curacy at Nuneaton, and owed at
that time about 501. He was to lave 1501.
• year in Liverpool. He bad private pupils, including Dr.
M•Neilv's sass After about a year sad a half, with • view
to improve his position, he nought the equity of redemp-
tion of two houses in Prince's Park for 6001., borrowing
4501. of the mousy from an mamma office. Hiving to
pay the interest on this and the mortgage of 1,6004 he
was obliged to run into debt to tradesmen. Prom
that tiros he had never been solvent, but hoped to become
so by the increase of his pupils. His pert speculation was
to bay the equity of redemption of tea or a dozen houses in
Liverpool , for 5251., the mortgage on them being 1.475/.
To enable him to do this he borrowed 300/. at 6 per cent.
Mr. Sargood—What did you want with those twelve or
fourteen boner! . . . .

Bankrupt—l did it because of the interest of the mosey.
The boyars paid a great deal more than the interest.
Mr. Bargood—lt was a mere speculation !
Bankrupt—A mere speculation.
Mr. eergood—What was the next speculatioa you tried
at!

B.,,kr•pt—la 1858 or 1850, I lewiglit the advoweria of
church, Liverpool, for 4501., borrowing other 3001.
Infj. room and decorations which eat ooariderably
1.;772.000/.. of which I paidl,2ool. or 1,3001. ; the re-
..o,4er is still owing.
31,..5.",.,0d—Then each step you have taken has tended
JCher to =bursae you ? You have beams all the poorer
of the richer for those purchmes ?
expected it would be otherwise. (A land)
1„, 50r3/. in a concern called the ()noes! Apothecaries'
co.p.si, I wee drawn into that by being told that it wee
.4, to pay • large amount of interest.
yr. ;snood—A mere speculation in shares?
Itrikrupt—Yea-
yr. Sargood—And you lout your mosey?
twoclupt—They returned 7a in the pound two years
I sold the advoirson of Trinity Church for about
.0.. 1 nest bought another school, at • place called
W•terloo. mar Liverpool, Idrireing to give 3601. for the
and Situres, and 300 i. for the equity of
• f the building, on which there was a mortgage of
I only paid 901. or 1001. before the school wee
b" ea up.
yr. Suited—Then I suppose you became •very much the
eon for that speculation. Have you had any other 'pomp.
~see which required money'.
11,0srupt —Then I thought wining up to Loodoe.
ti.eet; that my school at Waterloo might Dot s
th,.ught of making an arrangement with my credit=
• up to Loodon. I mitered into • treaty for the lease
or Seaford Chapel, New Oxfordetreet. at a rent of 2001.
• r. sod I was to pay 400/. for the lease. The chapel had
ari,r.7.ed 1.601.0/. • year before that
Mr. sirgood—That would depend OD the popularity of the
rfacber.
lesicrupt— It had been in Chancery for some time. (A
Mr. •-argood —What became of that speculation! Did it
core to anything
I.4Arupt—l entered into • eostraot, and paid down
• . but was tumble to oome to terms. The Bev. If.
Bel-
. the chapel afterwards. In the beginning of 1862
mgbt of offering • composition of ss. in the pound
• •,:v Liverpool creditors. I then owed 8,0001. or
• About that time I gave a bill of saloon my furniture
• , I have been sued perhaps 15 or 20 times, would
• it was not 30. Davie( given up my church and let
...v., the report was spread that I bad gone entirely,
o my return to Waterloo, I was sued in every dim-
borrowed about 1,0001. from Mr. Hanley, drill-
• ,g 1 my school, undertaking to pay him 74 mid 10 par
Mr. Bagley—Had been induced to take the Waterloo
by promises of support from the friends of his
in Prince's-park hia income was upwards of
. • year. The houses of which he bought the equity
4emption paid u much an 18 or 30 per cent. Since
Liverpool he had been two or three weeks in Lewes

• 4argood contended chat the bankrupt had been
of rash and hazardous speculation and had coo-
:7,1o] debt' without probable mom of payment. The
age liabilities of 20,0001. had been contracted mainly
calm the last four or five years; creditors to the amount
11:011i. were wholly without security, and their mum.
xr wa no lase than 165, embracing tradesmen of all classes,
of them for small amounts. A brewer was a creditor
for an unretttnied cask • a bookseller, for 81. ; coal
Letebant, ; draper, 104. 9d_ • carpenter, 31. 164;
;racer. 7/. 101.; tailor, 111. Be. The list included 2 dairy-
,;ec. "grocers, 16 liesdrapers, 16 dyers and drapers,
poulterers, 1 cabman, 9 tutors, 1 curate, 12
saileri sad bootmaken, 27 stationers, 4 brewers, 5 00111-
jokii. 2r, persons for money lent (representing a total of
1. 7 medical men, 1 organist, 2 butchers, 1 proprietor
of a chapel. 2 architects, and 1 flour-dealer. It was melee-
choir to see a clergyman so far losing sight of the duties of
ks;catioe as to incur this avalanche of debt.
The Commissioser —lt is indeed a melancholy case. One
rcor eell pray—" Lead us not into temptation."
Mr. oarrood rid that had the bankrupt confined himself
the discharge of his ordinary duties, instead of being
before the court sow, be might have been a prosperous man.
He admitted that he had
entered on this career of speculation. Finding that his
first restore was unsuccessful, be ought to have abstained
from any others; but harlot launched himself into the
v; rtes of speculation, be seemed to have lost his head.
The Commissioner —" Demented" seems the proper
wrd ;oapply to such conduct. _ .

Mr. Saitioiid mid he was ultimately obliged to quit
1. emo,)l, and hide himself. One most lamentable case
v., of the drill and fencing master, Henley, who,
I.r.t. a little property of his own, had been
-I to raise money on it by mortgage and
to the bankrupt, on the temptation of
0. a high rate of interest. The bankrupt
',mined in this way from Henley between 1,1001. sod
offering first 7 then 10. and then 124 per cent.
.:-.-,•••• • clergyman. instead of praying to be kept out of
;:n.ptation himself, actually leading others into it. What-
vet pain the court might feel in dealing with the cam of •
tromp who bad so miscooducted himself, it would not
to mark its sense of such • course of proceeding.
Mr. Eagles said the bankrupt might at least congratulate
xtrlf on his case being now brought to an end. He had
..-en in the court fifteen months, and there bad been four.
:-ra adjournments from one cause or another. He corn-
%Amid of the vindictive conduct of the assignee, who, being
creditor himself. ha'l bought the debt of some one else.
:le bankrupt's char►cter of • clergyman afforded much
:.:,nuation for bit conduct ; by his education amid habits be
•a unacquainted with financial and speculative trans-
:nous.

TheCommissioner—Then be ought not to engage in them.
Mr. Bagley said it wee nothing unusual for clergymen to
on assintsoce of their congregations in taking
.arches and repairing them ; there were numerous in-
,aoces of this being dose with advantage to both parties.
gone to Liverpool se the curate of Dr. M'Neile, Mr.
zey had been induced by rromisesofsupportfromthefiiends
pupils, to take two houses in Prince's-park, Liverpool,
r the purposes of his school. He could not do this with-
.s baying the equity of redemption of the house. The
nee be bad pursued was justified by the increase of his
In like manner the purchase of the advoweon of
.mity Church had been • enocessful speenlatioa ; but sub-
fluent Punta bad indeed him to get rid of it. His most
`fortunate speculation was taking • wood school at
TAterloo-bouae, whereby he hoped to unite the two con-
:tines, but be had been disappointed is doing sn. Perhaps
. s.s over sanguine; but that was all the blame that
! be attributed to him. When be left Prince's-park
lan income of 2,0001. • year, and hie friends thought
-peculation not an unreasonable or improvident sue.
.rtunstely it proved • total failure. Having disposed
his interest in Trinity Church, and let his
for • few weeks, a rumour got abroad
be had rim away, and he was pressed
side,. He deeply regretted having to leave a number
..1 creditors unpaid, but he had DO alternative. He
- fitly sensible of the injury be bad indicted oa Mr.
ley, and had promised to reimburse him, if ever
the means. The learned gentleman concluded by
• that the henbanes speculations were not malt and
,rkets, ea they had all been entered into in ocionezioo
position, and that be had reasonable probability of
" his debts at the time he incurred them. He had
' ..•1111.0 to complain of the conduct of the suites%
. .efore proceeding against him, had advertised him in
:! liunotir reserved his judgment.