The Express.
London, England, 1867-01-31 00:00:00

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.

Sittings in Banco.—(Before Justices Mellor, Shee, and
Lush.)
rxr RTE •TARTI N.-GAME INFORMATION.

. .
Mr. Dugdale applied for a rule for r mandamus to three
justices of Warwickshire to receive the information of
James Brown against Joseph Thorpe for trespassing in the
day time on Mr. Startin's Lind in search of game. Brown, the
informer, is a police-constable, and the justices refused to
take his information, on the ground that the magistrates
of the county had come to the resolution that the infor-
mation in game cases of police constables should not be
received. The learned counsel wished to have the rale
made absolute in the tint instance. . .

Mr. Justice Mellor said the court could not do that.
The learned counsel might take a rule nisi.
Mr. Dugdale said he was afraid that would be of little
use. He would, however, take the rule returnable at
chambers.
Rule granted accoriliney.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)
ANsI.ELL V. ANSI/LI.L.

Dr. Smith and Mr. Willis for the petitioner ; Dr. Spinks,
Q.('., and Mr. Indenvick for the respondent.
The petitioner was the wife of Mr. Ansdell, of Bloom-
fields, near Keymer, Sussex, a gentleman of property, and
she sought • judicial separation on the ground of
cruelty. He had engaged her to teach his daughter
music, the petitioner -having previously been a widow,
engaged in tuition at Brighton. He married her in Feb-
ruary, 186-1, at which time he was 70 years of age, and
she about 30 years his junior. They had both been pre-
viously married and had had children. The marriage soon
turned out to be a very unpleasant one. A mouth after
the wedding Dr. Ithuidell, the petitioner's father-in-law,
paid her a visit. He was 80 years of age ; and he kissed
her ; whereupon the respondent, as was alleged,
flew into a violent paeuon, and threatened to
shoot the venerable doctor. It appeared also that
the respondent found his two step-eons excessively
disagreeable to him. At first he agreed to send the elder
to school, but he afterwards retracted his consent, and, as
his wife phrased it, made the boy "a servant's cad. " He
made him do all kinds of menial tasks and take his
meals in the kitchen. Once be beat him severely for
neglecting to feed his dogs ; and his language gene-
rally was abusive and blaepkeniotui. Almost immediately
after the wedding the respondent announced that he in-
tended to manage his house himself. Ho accordingly
locked up the food, and doled it out in the most penurious
manner. He only allowed his step-sons meat once a day,
and then ho grumbled at the bread bill, though it was not
more then a penny per head per diem. His conduct
to the petitioner bad materially injured her health,
and she doubted if she should ever be well again.
Once he had given his step-son permission to sit up till 9 ;
and afterwards seeing him be got ins passion and gave the
petitioner • push, which nearly sent her across the room.
On another occasion be attempted to throw her down-
stairs. Once he sent her backwards over a garden seat
by a blow upon her breast. He was usually
violent between the hours of 8 arid 10 in
the evening, after which he would generally
recover himself a little, or sometimes he would take a
cheroot and that would alsomake him milder. The fact was
his daughter had married against hie wishes, and be per-
petually accused petitioner of turning his own child out in
order to make room for hers, and be said that having lost
his own blood he could not take the blood of another
to his heart. Told him that she did not wish him
to regard her children as sons, but only to treat them hos-
pitably and as a friend. The accusation was unjust ; for
petitioner had married solely for affection, and for that
love of a home which was natural to every woman.
He (respondent) had given an harmonium to the church,
and two ladies of the archdeacon's family came to
thank him for the present. They left the arch-
deacon's card, and the night following he went
and beat James (the petitioner's son) for letting in two
relations of his mother to rob him. He also
told him that he had no business to admit the archdeacon.
Hearing the noise she ran into the room, and reproached
him with striking her son when he was in Lis first
sleep. He then turned on her, gave her two blows,
knocked her head against the wall, and squeezed her
so that her eyes became blood-shot. The last Sunday she
stayed with him, namely, the 13th of May last, he flew
into a great rage booms° she bad taken her son to church.
[The case was proceeding when our report left.]

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Winslow.)
IN RE C. M. E. MARSHAL.

This was a sitting for last examination and discharge.
The bankrupt was a shipbroker of 155, Fenchurch-street,
formerly trading in partnership with Mr. W. G. Gibson,
and since on his separate account. He ascribes his failure
to the sudden depreciation in the price of grain and coals,
of which commodities be was responsible for three cargoes
also to his has Mg been hol,rol.rrly induced to part with three
bills of exchange, amounting to 750/. , upon the consideration
that a vessel chartered for the homeward voyage was on
C=to Alexandria, whereas, in fact, she had not left
1 ; and to having been suede's the bills of exchange.
The accounts show dcbta and liabilities, 1,544/.; no assets ;
property held as security, l'2l/., being an I 0 U for 211.
and a homeward charterer's order for 1007. upon the ship
New Brunswick, deposited with Mr. W. H. Marshal, of
The Grove, Hammersmith, a creditor.
Mr. Bagley appeared for the bankrupt, and Mr. Sykes
for the official assignee.
Upon examination the bankrupt said that his partner-
ship with Gibson oomnieneed in March, 1865, but it was
dissolved after a brief existence. Gibson did not introduce
any capital, as arranged, nor had he any connexion. The
speculations in which they were engaged had resulted in
a loss. On shipments of oats from Archangel. a loss of
700/. had accrued. He hail also lost 3001. on the freight
of coals. The liabilities appearing on the accounts had
been incurred by him through the misrepresentation of a
person named Morrison.
Mr. Sykes said that notice bad been given to all the
creditors. . . .

........—.
There was no opposition, and an immediate order of
discharge was granted.

REDrCTION OF WAGES AT THE MONMOUTHSHIRE
TRONWOKS.—A month's notice has been posted up at the
principal ironworks of Monmouthshire, and the same
will terminate at the end of February. In other iron pro-
ducing districts of South Wales a reduction of 10 per cent.
lean already been carried out without opposition, but as
the Monmouthshire ironmasters did not give notice at the
same time, the bands were beginning to hope that such
an improvement would be experienced in the demand for
iron as the new year advanced as to render a reduction
unnecowary. This expectation, however, has not been
realised, dulness prevails in every branch of the trade, and
it iswith difficulty sufficient orders are secured to keep the
works partly employed. Under these circumstances the
employers considered they had no alternative but to give
notice of a drop of 10 per cent., and the reduced scale will
come into effect at the end of February. From what can
be gathered of the feeling of the men on the matter, it is
not expected that they will offer any resistance to the pre.
posed reduction.,