The Express.
London, England, 1859-05-21 00:00:00

, 1859.

they left the tent together; but on the foliating evening she
ca n.e to loin by herself, and spent the night in his icor. He
thin went with her to Nouvelle. This led, of course, to
some 'caudal ; but through the mediation of the mi.eery au-
thotitioa, an arrangement was come to of the nature indi-
cated in the pludings. Thu corraspoidettos concluded with
a characteristic leut r from the lets Sir C. Napier. Captain
Anderson had undertaken to leave the corps; but after la
vain attempting to ex..hange into ten other regiments, head
written to inform the minuet (Lieut.-Cob:mei Boileau) d his
want of guava. Colonel Bakal, under these circumstancea,
submitted the cue to Bir C. Napier, and received his answer
la the following terms : . .

"24th October, 1850.
"My dear Boileau,—Where all parties have behaved so
uweemly, it Is hard to de.ide what is beet, and what is not.
Bad is the beet. Anderson has been weak, Rateliff has
acted, in my opinion as you describe (i.e., decidedly
culpably!) 'Bad busiest& make bad lOC's,' is a very
generally received mottos. The exceptions are few. This
may be ens; but neither your account nor what I have
tweet from others lead me to think that it is nee. It seems
clear that Andersen did not reduce Mrs. It. That Mr. Ret-
ell! did not consider that he had, Is evident by his consult-
ing Anderson; and I consider appearances so much against
this gentleman (Rstcliff), that I think, if either, it behoves
him rather than Anderson to quit the corps ; but I think it
is a matter so entirely between these two, that I do not see
why you should not absolve Anderson from his pro-
mos. His only fault was not being a Joseph.
(Laughter.) It was a great fault, but still I do
not think that Ret.liff has a claim to demand
Anderson's loss of profession, because Mrs. Ilateliff chose
to invade his tent uninvited. I think Anderson is to be '
pitied, not punished, beyond paying as he has done. And
if &guilt chores to stay, I do not see why you or I should
have Loathing to say to the matter. In short, the cam is
simply this—ta • good officer to leave the regiment becsnas
another officer cannot rule his wile, who without seduction
on the pat of the good offiorr, chooses to go to bed with
bins ? I really think it is • question for the parties
themselves to settle.

"Anderson bee paid dearly for his weakness, and I res sss
justice is forcing him to lose his profession. I would trivet
him beck hie promise. Ned Captain Andenon sednoed Mrs.
Ratel4, or it he had kept her with him, he must have left
the regiment certainly.. You know best bow this matter
Mazda, and what is tiegeneral feeling of the oilkere. All of
you are conversant la the details—l ern not; and I cannot
Interfere beyond the sewer to your question, that is to my,
were I in poemosion of Anderson's promise he should
have it beck.—Yours, &r. "C. Norms.
Leutenaut-Colood Boileau."
Dr. Phillimore submitted that under the circumstances
disclosed in the correspondence it was doubtful whether the
owe woe one is which be ought to interfere; but it we.
clearly not one in which the co•respoodeut, who was at this
moment paying 1001. s year for the respondent's maintenance,
and who had never seen her since she loft India, ought to be
medicaid is accosts.
Dr. Bwabey then addressed the court on !Mall oftbe wife.
Dr. Deane, is reply, pointed mat that the result of Colonel
Anderson's not fulfilling the third part of his promise had
been to compel him to quit the service himself.
The court took time to consider.

HAWITARD V. NAWILYAND ►YD FOSTER.

nt...• pillion for a (Illinoisan:is of marriage, promoted
by W. Hawkyard straicet Mary Ann, his wife, for adultery
committed with a person unknown, and with the co-rw
'rodent, James Footer..

rThipartteTeWere-C-Lrn'ed at the parish church, Leeds, on
the 7th of August, 1843, and had had three children. Evi-
dence was given to the affect that she was In the habit of
receiving visits from a persoo, which were followed by results
that caused her husband to mend her home. After cheat
wee proved that she had openly cohabited with the co-
respondent.
Dr. Spinke appeared for the husband. The other parties
were undefended.
The caurt decreed the diewohtlion as preyed.
PLCROVER V. PECCOVER AND SOLLT.

The petitioner, Mr. Edmund Peckover, is a tailor, carrying
oa business in Maddock-street, Regent. street. Is MT, being
&widower with live children, he maul. d the reepmdent, then
• Miss Harriette Bklckletlaorte, sad a short time dunes:de
Ist the first floor of his house, No. 6, Stanhope-terrace,
Csmden-town. to the ao-re.pondene Mr. Bernard Charles
Jolly. Jolly lived at the house for about • year, and during
that time be became very 'inmate with the petitioner's wife.
A great many suspicious circumstanced were stated, but no
evidence of indecent familiarity wu given. At length she
absconded, and no positive intormation could be obtained u
to her whereabouts; but It wee conjectured that she was in
America.

ill;:ierjeent Pigott (with whom was Mr. Field) con-
Waded that enough bed teen shown to juatily the decree;
bat mutually the case was adjourned.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS COURT.-MAT 20.

IN 11 DAVID 11111111.

We are requested by Yeses. Lemon, of No. 12, St.
Helw'e•plsoe, to state that the pos...a named Lover.oo
mentioned in the report of this ogee yesterday is no OAP
I•XiSM of theirs, nor in say way known to than.

-----
THE POLICE COURTS.

MANSION-HOUSE.

Jolts Craw 1142 chutol with having smuggled three
pound' of foreign manufactured tobacco.
Au ofther of ths customs said that he saw the defendant
coming from a stamen-teasel, and as be had a very bulky sp-
ree:mice, and was Moen to be connected with contraband
trade, it was at once suspected that he was officiating is the
old way at that moment.
Aldorman Cubitt—What hare you to my, defendant?
Yon have been tiara Wore

Defiant:Li—Yes, my lord ; I bare been charged before.
Alderman Cutritt—And what was your punishment then?
Defendant—Well, I think I had a math for it.
It was stated that the defendant hod upon the list occasion
of a smuggling oonviction been fined 31. or 41., and he paid
the penalty.
The excise officer said the tobaooo found upon the de-
fendant had been evidently compresred for smuggling, and
was of the kind constantly tired by ouch men as the prisoner.
Aldermen Cabin rentenerel the defendant to imprisonment
for one month, or the penalty of 31.
Jame, Poselter' who was a few days ago charged with
having robbed his employers, Messrs. Dillon and Co., of
Water-lone, Great Tower-street, printers, was brought up for
final examination.

The prisoner bed been to the reiployment of the memen-
toes for many roontbs, rod no suspcien hrd been entertained
of Ids integrity. lie It as, however, discharged la conse-
quence of not having been perfectly =ebbed to do his
allotted boninem, and subsequently information was
given th.t he had robbed his employers, and •
quantity of their tyie and paper was found
in Isla house. Ile pleaded guilty et petty eisiions,
end hie medic.' attendant stated tbet he was frequently
affected in his bead in consequence of pi riodioal acts of
drunkennese. Ilia =tidier gave him =excellent character.
Tha Alderman said thr court would mitigate the sentence
of six months' to foes months' imprisonment, in consequence
of the later position of tba castors.
1111ARLBOROUUEI-STREET.

dottenie Bergman, en Italian organ grinder, who was said
to be blind, was charged with the following assault upon a
gentleman is Piccadilly.
A medical certificate being put in to the effect that the
petleman was usable to attend tbrougb the Injury iedicted,
Feast, 331 A, deposed that at ten o'clock the previous night
ha wen called, and founts gentleman bleeding from the fore-
head wry copiowly, who' raid tte wound had: bean indicted
by the prisoner with a atfek he bad in his head.
The evidence, the defindant being unacquainted with
Beating, was interpreted to Lim, and the answer was that be
had b:en annoyds pme one pulling at his organ' which
he was playing, and being exasperaW struck out, and hit
the wiring person perhaps.
Ramada.