The Express.
London, England, 1867-01-28 00:00:00

CHL'IfER CV P.

Ivl Intelligence.

METROPOLITAN COUNTY COURT&
(Skiing days appointed for the present week )

Wignamillit, 8t liitirielasse—Tuesaay, Jan. 29, Wednes-
day, 30.
Baourroll, WlGtebead's-grove.—Tuesday, Jan. 29; Wednes-
day, 30.
CLustiiierni, Duncan-terrace. —Tuesday, Jan. T 9; Wednes-
day, 30: Thursday, 31.
SMORND/TCH,OId-street-road.—Tateday, Jan. 29 : Thursday, 31.
Bow, Bowrod.—lerlday, Feb. 1
IVIIITICHAPIL, Great Presootstreet—Wednesday, Jan. 30;
Thursday, 31.
Soorsweit, Swan-street—Tuesday, Jan. 39; Thursday, 31.
GILENNWICH.—WedDeaday, January 30.
Woutincti.—Thursday, Jan. 31.
Cm or LONDON, Ordldhall-buildlnira —Thursday, Jan. 31.
CENTRAL CRIMINAL Cooar.—Monday, Jan. M.

EQUITY COURTS.—JAR. 26.
(Before the Lord Chanoellor and Lord Justice Turner.)
THOMPSON T. HUDSON.
-

The facts of this case have already appeared In our
columns. The court gave judgment to-day. It was an
appeal from the Muter of the Iloilo, in • matter relating
to the litigation between the York and North Midland
Railway Company and the well-known Mr. George Hud-
son. In the. year 1853 three decrees were made in dif-
ferent suits, in each of which the above railway company
was plaintiff and Mr. Hudson defendant. Two of the de-
crees directed certain accounts to be to ken, and by the
third the defendant was directed to pay 54,5901. to the
company on or before August, 1854, of which he was to
pay into court 20,0001. on the first day of Hilary term, and
the remainder on the tint day of Raster term fol-
lowing. Subsequently an agreement was entered
into, under which Mr. Hudson was to execute
• mortgage to the company of a freehold estate
called Newby-park, which he had recently agreed to sell to
Lord Downs for 190,0001., for securing to them 50,000/.
sad 1,0001. with interest. This agreement was embodied
in a formal deed, but Hudson made default in the per-
formance of some of the terms, and the question was
whether the railway company could enforce against the
defendant the payment of the whole of the original
balance, or whether they were only entitled to be paid
the smaller sum. The Master of the Rolls had sup-
ported the latter contention.
The Lord Chancellor inclined to the opinion entertained
by the Muter of the Rolls ; but,
Lord Justice Turner was of opinion that the decision of
the court below should be reversed, with • slight mo-
dification as to the time of taking some of the accounts.
The result is that the decree of the court below stands
affirmed subject to such modification.
The Attorney-General, Mr. Jeasel, Sir R. Palmer, Mr.
Selwyn, Mr. Jackson, Mr. W. W. Cooper, and Mr.
limns= appeared for the several parties.

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL.—JAN. 26.
(Before Lord Chief Baron Kelly, Justices Blackburn,
Willes, and Keating, aad Mr. Baron Pigott.)
THE QUEEN V. GEEENIJJM.

The defendant, who was the manager of the Leedsßank-
ing Company (Limited), was convicted in October last, at
the Central Criminal Court, before Mr. Baron Pigott, of
perjury committed by him in an affidavit made under the
provisions of the act to enable bankers to use certain un-
stamped promissory notes and bills of exchange upon the
payment of a composition in lieu of the stamp duties
thereon. The defendant was in the receipt of 3,1100/. per
annum, with twelve clerks under his control. On the
trial three objections were taken-Ist. That the affidavit
was not made before the person empowered to take it, but
should have been made before a justice of the peace. 2nd.
That the defendant was not the proper person to make
the affidavit, he not being a cashier, accountant, or chief
clerk, according to the words of the act. And :(rd. That
there should have been evidence given that the commis-
sioners of stamps expressly required the affidavit
of a cashier, accountant, or chief clerk, in ad-
dition to that of the persons empowered to
issue bills and notes. The learned baron overruled
the objections, and directed the jury that the prisoner was
proved to he a chief clerk sufficient for the purposes of the
statute, and that the evidence which showed that the
commissioners had for years received and acted upon the
affidavits of the prisoner, as manager or chief clerk, was
sufficient to show that they required an affidavit of every
requirement where necessary. The jury found the pri-
soner guilty. If the court should be of opinion that either
of the objections was good in point of law, the prisoner was
to be discharged ; otherwise, if the verdict was to stand.
he was to come up for judgment at the next meeting of
the court.

Mr. Mellish, Q.C., and Mr. F. H. Lewis appeared for
the crown ; Mr. Gifford, Q.C., and Mr. Sleigh for the
prisoner.
The court held that the conviction was good. The AM.
davit had been made before a proper person. A
manager or secretory of a company was nothing mom
than &chief clerk, and the defendant was a person quali-
fied to make the required affidavit.
Conviction affirmed.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
JAN. 26.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)
HAYCOCK (FALSELY CALLED PEATY) T. PEATY.

- -
After our report left on Saturday,
Mr. Samuel Tryan, formerly one of Dr. Taylor's pupils,
said that just before Mrs. Peaty went to church to be
married she said she thought the whole thing was a trap,
and that they were going to poison her at the wedding
breakfast. She often accused Mrs. Taylor and wittiest, of
stealing things of hers, which things were generally found
a few minutes afterwards about her. She told witness
Dr. Lee had informed her that marriage was the only cure
for her maladies, and she made witness an offer of her
hand, which he respectfully declined. (Laughter.) She
had several times asked him to elope with her. On
the evening before the marriage she was worse
than witness had ever seen her before. She said
that her marriage was of importance to the
whole world and she refused to be married till
Mr. Peaty had ordered the menet bells, those at Ken-
sington, to be rung. Then there was an altercation about
reading the communion service to her every night. At
first Mr. Peaty seemed inclined to give in ; but he was
advised that if he did, he would probably have to give in
to her upon a good many other points. Then she got up
in a passion, declared that she would not be married at
all, and left the room flinging her anus about. Dr. Taylor
strongly advised Mr. Peaty nut to marry her at all, or at
all events to wait for a month ; but the respondent said
he was informed that marriage would cure her, and
that her madness arose for her extreme love for him.
Tho same evening Mrs. Peaty said that if Robert (respon-
dent) did not come round,she would marry witness or Dr.
Harmer, for married she would be. Once Mr. Peaty
asked witness, if he really thought she was mad. Told
him that any fool could see it. Her manner at the wed-
ding was very restless ; and in the vestry she kissed Dr.
Harmer, remarking that it was all his fault that he was
not the bridegroom. (Laughter.) Mr. Peaty took it very
coolly ; and she told him that it did not matter now that
they were married.
Craw-examined—Went with Mr. Peaty to get the
marriage license ; but at that time witness had never
given the question a thought whether the marriage of an
insane person would be legal.
Mrs. James, a sister of the alleged wife, was also examined
in support of the petitioner's case.
Mrs. Eliza Broom, at whose house the parties had lived
after the marriage, also gave corroboratory evidence. On
one occasion Mrs. Peaty had locked her husband in the
thawing-room all night.
Dr. Spinks said the case was one of the most singular
ever brought before a court of justice. The respondent
had had no pecuniary inducement whatever in marrying
hie wife ; for she wax entirely dependent upon an uncle,
who disapproved of the match. There could therefore be
but one solution of the matter, namely, that Mr. Peaty
had married Miss Hancock from love, and he now resisted
the petition because he had sworn at the altar to protect
her es long as she lived. He abe learned doctor) might
not perhaps be able to contend that at the time of the
marriage Miss Hancock was of sufficient capacity to make
a will ; but it would be enough to show that she was of
capacity to give consent; for, according to the old maxim,
"consensus tacit connubium." Moreover, everything was
to be presumed in favour of marriage. There were many
things "que non fieri debent, sed facts valent" For ex-
ample, the marriage of minors might be solemnised with-
out various necessary consents, and yet the marriage
once done would be good. In the present case
everything tended to show that Miss Hancock was
perfectly able to give her consent. As the court
had been told, the parties were engaged in 18:a, but the
affair had been broken off by the intervention of Mr. Han-
cock, the uncle. In 1863 Miss Hancock, while staying at
Dr. Taylor's,was taken to consult that eminent physician.
Dr. Robert Lee, who advised her that marriage would
probably cure her, and she thereupon wrote the following
note to Mr. Petty:—" 64, Queen's-road, Bayswater, 17th
July, 1863. My Cousin,—l know quite well that you
will be pleased to hear of my progress since leaving Chad-
well-street. My head, which you know was then rather
weak from over-exertion and many causes, is greatly im-
proved, and my health altogether. Still, lately, even in
this very hot weather, I have feelings as if I were encased
with ice. Having no particular ambition of becoming an
animated iceberg, I applied, by uncle Thomas's very kind
permission, to Dr. Lee, and was relieved to bear from him
that there was no disease whatever—only disordered
functions. He positively told Dr. Taylor, with whom
I am at present stopping, that he should advise
(if I were engaged) marriage as an establishment of the
cure. I need hardly tell you how perfectly I coincide
with this very good advice, and as Dr. Taylor has silenced
my scruples with regard to our relationship being any
hindrance to this step, if you are still perfectly disengaged
and perfectly free, I shall be moat harpy to see you here,
and lam sure Dr. Taylor also. I shall be haply to hear
any proposals you may make me, and thanking you for
your uniform kindness to me at all times, I remain, my
dear cousin, yours very affectionately, 111 A. liaecie
Dr. Spinks also read a series of letters which Miss Han-
cock had written to the respondent between the;
i
coherenty
re-
engagement
and sensible
andthe
marriage.doc documents, anThel were
rt
man contended, therefore, that Mr. Peaty bad not only
I acted moat honourably in the matter, but that in marry-