The Express.
London, England, 1867-03-04 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, MONDAY EVENING, MARCH 4, 1867.

Dranta.

ST. JAMFITS.

NC'

nil Id

t-4.`,1 II
951

101 4

106;

171 Is;

Ole : xd

-
3 1-16

A very alight two-act piece —a mere dramatic
omelette wallet—adapted from a comedy by M. Barden
called Le N9cl, which was first acted at the Theatre De..
jazet, in 1614, was produced at this house on Saturday
night, under the title of A Rapid Thaw, the adapter being
Mr. T. W. Robertson. Le Di , like too many modern
French comedies, has a flavour in it which cannot be
transferred to the English stage, and the purifying process
only leaves tasteless characters and incidents—leather, and
not venison. Mr. Robertson probably adapted this drama
in his Darid Garrick days, when he was distrustful
of his powers of invention, or else in one of those
lazy moods to which all authors are subject
at times, and under the influence of which
they are more prone to "fudge " than to write. The piece
is very brilliantly placed upon the stage—the period illus-
trated being the age of Louis X V.—the characters
arc all connected with the court, and the hero, Hector de
Bassompierre, is a woman hater until he falls in love.
Miss Herbert represents Hector, a part originally per.
formed by Dejazet, and the rest of the parts are distri-
buted amongst Mr. and Mrs. Frank Matthews, Mr. Gaston
Murray, Mr. Henry Irving, Miss Bufton, Min Carlotta
Addison, and Miss Ada Cavendish. They all did their
best with very poor materials, but hardly succeeded in
making the comedy a Niece's. Miss Herbert appeared to be
suffering from weakness, as her voice was very. indistinct.
The house was crowded.

STRAND.
Mr. H. J. Byron's auccesaf ul burlesque, Esmeralda,
was revived at this house on Saturday night.

tato Intelligence.

SIETROPOLITAN COUNTY MCAT&
(Bitting days appointed toe the present week.)
WRS7nnitrait, St Martins-lane. Wednesday, March 6;
Thursday, 7; and Frklay, 8.
81.0011911 CRY, Portland-mad—Wednesday, March 6 ; Thurs—
day. 7 ; Friday, &
mAßnmost, Marylebone.road.—Tuesday, March $; Wed-
nesday, 6: Friday, 8.
WANDSWORTH. Southstreet—Tursday, March 5.
Sautsprrai, Old.street-road.—Tuceday, March : Thurs-
day, 7.
Bow, Bow-mad.—Monday, March 1 : Friday, 8.
WIIITECIIAPEL, Great Presceistreet. Thursday, March 7 ;
Friday, s.

-
806111WAllt, Swan-street.—Wednesday, March 6: Thursday,
7 ,Yriday, 8,

Lammers, Camberwell New.road.—Taeaday, ?larch 5. Med-
nesday. f.
(ITT or LONDON, March 4.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
mA HUB 2.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)
MAXWELL r. MAXWELL AND WESTCAEL-ISORMOUB DAMAGES
In this case, on Saturday,

Sir J. P. Wilde (who spoke with much apparent
emotion) said that this was indeed a miserable case—a
case that made one doubt how far the establishment of the
court had proved a blessing or otherwise. Here was •
young man married to a young woman of the same age in
1861, and living with her upon terms of affection and re
prtl, which, according to the description of the wit-
nesses, could rarely have been surpassed ; and yet at the
beginning of 1866, hardly three years after the beginning of
their wedded life, they separated, driven from one
another's society, the co-respondent taking the place of the
husband, the home broken up, the happiness of the
man gone, and the affection which had formerly subsisted
between the parties, so far as the wife was con-
cerned, destroyed. When this court was estab-
lished there was a great difference of opinion
as to the benefits likely to be derived from it.
Some of the best and wisest men in the kingdom doubted
whether it would do any good at all ; and there certainly
were cases which inclined one to think one way, and
others the other. What were they to ray to • case like
this ? Suppose there was no divorce, would it be right
that this woman should remain tied to a husband towards
whom she had so greedy violated her duty! Again, sup-
paw there was a divorce, the court had to deal with
three persons, one utterly innocent, two guilty, though
one was probably more guilty than the other. Where fell
the blow ? Why the innocent party suffered most, for
upon Lim the burden was cast of beginning life afresh.
Of the guiltythe less culpablewiui probablythe wounin,and
she would suffer next in degree, for wherever modest people
congregated her name would probably never again be
heard. The most guilty, the man, without the inter
vention of the law, would suffer nothing. Again,
if the law was to be useful at all, it must be deterrent, and
one of the functions of the court, though an indirect one,
was so to act in dealing with cases of this kind that it
might be • terror to wrong-doers. But how was it to pre.
vent the indulgence of unlawful passions if, while affect-
ing to release a husband who had been wronged, it
really allowed •paramour to snatch his wife from his arms?
It appeared to him that it was only through the
medium of the damages which the jury inflicted
that they could hope to place any restraint
upon those whom higher motives could not sway. The
learned judge then went through the evidence, and ex-
pressed his opinion that while on the one hand the peti-
tioner was free from any imputation of carelessness,
indifference to his wife, or impropriety of any kind, the
co-respondent on the other had omitted scarcely any-
thing that could aggravate his misconduct.
The jury, without a moment's hesitation, found a verdict
for the full amount claimed (10,0001.), a result which was
received by a crowded court with loud applause.
The Judge Ordinary then made a decree nisi with costs.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

HOME ClRClllT.—Hzierrosp, MARCH 2.

(Before Lord Chief Justice &Mil and a Special Jury.)
PRIOR r. THE YORIEHHIRE CONSERVATIVE NEWSPAPER

COMPANY.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff, a gentle-
man well known upon the turf, to recover damages from
the defendants, the proprietors of the Yorkshire Peg and
Leeds liaeffioeneer, for having published a false and de-
famatory libel concerning him in that journal.
The defendants pleaded, generally, not guilty.
Serjeant Parry and Mr. Gates appeared for the plaintiff ;
and Mr. Montagu Chambers, Q.C., and Mr. Patchett, for
the defendants.

Serjeant Parry, in opening the ease to the jury, said
that the action was brought against the defendants for a
very serious libel inserted in their newspaper respecting the
plaintiff. Mr.Pryor was a gentleman of coneiderablefortune,
which he inherited from an uncle, who was formerly one of
the well-known firm of Truman, Hanbury, and Co., and
resided at Digawell-house, Welwyn, in this county.
He had always been fond of field sports, and about five
years ago he purchased a stud of race horses, and entered
into turf pursuits with a true sporting spirit, and with
the determination to carry on his operations with honour
and in a thoroughly straightforward manner. It ap-
peared that in the month of June, 1865, he purchased at
the sale of Mr. Blenkiron's stock at Eltham a bay yearling
colt, which had since been named The Rake, and which
was considered by those acquainted with such matter+ to
be likely to win the approaching Derby, and it was with
respect to this horse that the present action had arisen.
The plaintiff gave 450 guineas for the colt, rind be was
considered so promising an animal that he was at once
entered for the Derby and St. Leger, and several
other races. He bad only made two public performances,
the first, as a two year old. in March, 1806, when he won
the Althorp Park Stakes at Northampton, and the second,
in the same year, at Newmarket, in October, when he
won the Middle Park Plate, and it was in reference
to his winning of this race that the libel complained of
was published. When the jury had heard the nature of
that libel he was quite sure they would feel that it was
one of • very serious character, and he might state that
every opportunity had been afforded to the defendants of
justifying it if they had been in a position to do so, but
they had failed to put any plea of justification upon the
record, and there was no doubt they felt that it was im-
possible for them to do so. The libel was contained in
an anonymous communication, at least one that was
merely signed " Observer," which extended to consi-
derable length, and which after a good deal of turf
gossip proceeded to refer to the plaintiff's horse The
Rake, and to the circumstances under which he was re-
presented to have won the Middle Park Plate. It
commenced by stating, "The manner in which The Rake
was worked before he ran for the Middle Park Plate
has given rise to more dissatisfaction and strong lan-
guage than any event that has taken place at Newmarket
since the unfortunate Tarragona affair." The jury would
no doubt remember the circumstances connected with the
matter hero referred to, and that an inquiry took place
before the Jockey Club into the conduct of two officers
who were undoubtedly charged with having acted in the
most dishonourable manner, if not, indeed, with deliberate
fraud, and the jury would see that the public were led to
infer from this statement that the proceedings that had
taken place with reference to The Rake ware even worse
than those connected with the Tarragona affair. The
learned serjeant then proceeded to reed the remainder of
the article complained of, and which was to the effect that
• " flash " trial of The Rake had been got up,nt which Mr.
Matthew Dawson, the trainer for the Duke of Newcastle.
had been specially invited to be present, and that
he war deceived as to the weights that were
carried by the horses in the trial, and was in-
duced, consequently, to come to the conclusion that
The Hake was only a moderate animal, and to report to
that effect to the Duke of Newcastle and others, who
were by this means induced to bet against hint. The re-
sult of this contrivance was that the plaintiff, the owner
of The Rake, was enabled to get in an immense amount of
money at long odds, and a great many persons, among
whom was Sir Frederick Johnstone, who had a commission
to bet upon The Middle Park Plate, and who had betted
heavily upon the Rake for the Derby, were prevented
from hedging any of their money, and the article concluded
by representing that after the race had been won, it was
admitte,l to Mr. Matthew Dawaon that the pretended
trial hail only been got up for the purpoite of " throwing
dust in his eyes." He said lie should be able to show
that, with the exception of the fact that • trial
really tiok place a few days before the Middle
Park race was run every one of the pretended circum-
stances narrated in this statement was false, and that
there was not the slightest ground for charging the plain-
tiff with the dishonourable conduct referred to. The fact
was that on the Saturday before the race Mr. Joseph
Daemon, the trainer for Mr. Pryor, suggested that there
should bea trial of The Rake, in orderto test his capabilities
and ascertain what chance he had of winning the race,
and it was unnecessary for him to inform the jury that
this was not only • very necessary, hut a perfectly ordi-
nary proceeding with every gentleman who kept race
horses, and who desired to discover whether it was of any
use to run a horse for • particular race. The Rake, when
the trial took place, was pitted against two aged horses,
named Troublesome and The Novice, and • two-year old
horse called Fripounier. The two aged horses, as was
expvted, beet The Rake, but be best Friponnier,carrying
Nat. 71h., The latter only carrying fist., and the
trial was a perfectly fair one, and took place on the
open heath, and although Mr. Matthew Dawson might
have been present, he was certainly not invited, and
every one of the statements concerning him was false in
every particular. The learned serjeant then observed that
he was sure the jury would feel the very serious nature of ,
the libel, and ho observed that if the statements contained •

in it had had any foundation in truth, the consequences
must necessarily have been that the plaintiff would have
been shunned by every honourable member of the turf,
and he would have been warned off every race-course
where the Jockey Club had any authority. His only ob-
ject, therefore, in bringing the present action was to vin-
dicate his character, and his object would be partly at-
tained by his making the present public statement, and
he hoped his lordship would permit Mr. Pryor to get into
the witness-box, and state publicly and upon his oath
that the calumnious statements contained in the
article complained of were entirely false and destitute of
all foundation. He would not say a word in reference to
the effect the statements he had referred to were likely to
have upon The Rake, who, lie hoped, might still win the
Derby, but so far as Mr. Pryor and his friends were con-
cerned he hoped the object they desired to obtain of
placing Mr. Pryor before the world in his proper posi-
tion as a man of honour and a gentleman would be
effected by the present proceedings. Mr. Pryor had no
vindictive feeling towards the defendants, but he felt,
and hie friends agreed with him in the opinion, that
the only place in which such charges as had been made
against him could be properly refuted was in a public
court of justice.
Chief Justice Bovill mid that the charges contained in
the article complained of were undoubtedly of a most
serious character, and if there had been any truth in them
the plaintiff would certainly have been not only un-
fitted to hold the position of member of the Jockey Club,
' but also for the society of gentlemen, and that no
other course was left open to set himself right with his
friends and with the public than the one he had adopted.
The plaintiff had placed himself in the witness box, and
bad positively denied that there was any foundation
for the charges made against him, and had subjected him-
self to cross-examination, and a most handsome apology
had been made on behalf of the defendants—an apology
which it appeared to hint was perfectly satisfactory to the
plaintiff.
The jury then returned a verdict for the plaintiff, with

It was slated that the 2 il. would be banded by the
plaintiff to the Herta Infirmary.