The Express.
London, England, 1861-03-12 00:00:00

COURT OF PROBATE_ AND DIVORCE.

mace 11.
(Before the Judge Oniinary.)
LEWIS r. trwiA.

This wail a petition by a wife for a dissolution et her
marriage on the ground of adultery and cruelty.
Mr. Serjeaut Sher appeared fur the petitioner ; but the
respondent did not appear.
The respondent, a weaver at Bpitaltields, married the
petitioner, the daughter of a silk manufacturer, in June,
IU6. There had Well eight children, of whom only three
survived. The marriage had never been a happy one, the
respondent having been addicted to the use of coarse and
threatening language. There were only two casesof actual
violence, a blow in 1447, and a push at a much later period.
There were several temporary sepanitious, but the coliabita-
tins was not finally suverea till Before then the
nopondent had communicated a shameful disease to his
wife. She was at the time far advanced in pregnancy, and
the result of her distress of mind was to bring on a prema-
ture ocutheineat and the birth of a deed child.

Sir C. Cresewell, in summing up, omimented strongly on
the practice of calling witnesses whose testimony, like that
of several in this instance, could not advance the case one
jot. Much a practice had the effect of a-inverting into an
engine of oppreasion the indulgence which the law showed
towards a wife in directing her costa to be paid by her
huabend.

Thejury,witbout hesitation, found for the petitioner; and
The Court dissolved the marriage, with mom.

BROWN r. BROWN AND N'OLONS.

Mr. Brown, a farmer and mottle dealer in Warwickshire,
married the respondent, the daughter of another farmer,
named York, a* the sth of June, VIA. Latterly she had
bemuse addicted to drink, and in 18.56 she formed an WO•
terms connexion with an Irish servant of her husband,
named Michael M'Glone. _

Evidence was given by • female servant to the effect
that while the petitioner was from home she used to sleep
with her mistress ; but that on one occasion )['Clone came to
the bedside, and the respondent inimediately sent her away.
Other servant, gave testimony confirmatory of this low
amour.

The jury found the limes for the husband, and
The Court &waived the marriage, with ecnta.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS COURT.—MAscit 11.
(Before the Chief Commirioser.)
TN RE MATTHEW BALLS.—AIcOMMODATIoN BILLS.

This insolvent, a young man described as an omnibus con.
doctor, residing at Brixton, who applied under the Protec-
tion Act, was opposed by Mr. Carr, a timber merchant,
and Mr. Gibb, a licensed victualler.
The insolvent had dabbled iu "bill transaction■," and
made them payable at the Unity Bank, where he never had
an account. Mr. Carr said he received two bills from •
customer, and was told that the acceptor, Mr. Balls, was
the omnibus proprietor at Brixton. He saw the insolvent
in the City, and be told him he was an omnibus proprietor,
and that the bills were given for horses. After the bills
were due the insolvent told him he had no value for them,
but had given them to • horse-dealer muted Martin.
Mr. Gibb complained that Martin, in purchasing a horse
of him, tendered him a bill accepted, as he told him, by
Balls, the omnibus proprietor at Brixton, and he gave him
9/. as the difference. This bill was made payaLle at the
Unity Bank. He opposed Martin in this court, and he re-
ceived a judgment of six months, and was now in prison.
The insolvent said he had accepted the bills for Martin,
as be bad offered to set him up in the "bus" business.
He bad accepted bills fur other persons for " general put,
poem."
His Honour held that he had no jurisdiction to entertain
such a case, and in his opinion Mr. Carr's debt had been
fraudulently contracted. He could give no further protec-
tion, and had no power to appoint a final order day.