The Express.
London, England, 1868-02-01 00:00:00

THE FtXPM3,B $A'

lino lEntelftistute.

COURT OF QIIEF.Ni BENOH.—JAw. SL
Sittings in Benoo.—(Before the Lord Chief Judos said
Justices Blackburn, Mellor, and Lush.)
This was the last day of term, and strange to say there
were no motions to be made, sad the court oommenced
with the new trial paper at the sitting of the murk

BeBILEY V. CORDER.
This was an action Naiad the father for necessaries rap-
t/lied to an infant, tried before the learned secondary
(Mr. Potter), when the jury returned • verdict for the
plaintiff. It was an action for clothes foe • child under
seven years of age, placed under the mother's control by the
Master of the Rolls in consequence of the father's conduct
being such as to compel the wife to leave his roof. The 11
question was whether that implied authority of • wife to &
pledge her husband's credit for necessaries applied also to at
the child . A role had been obtained to set the verdict ea
aside and enter • nonsuit, on the ground that the father It
was not liable.
Mr. Horace Lloyd appeared for the plaintiff ; Mr. M.
Keens, Q.C., and Mr. Bruce Campbell for the defendant.
Mr. Lloyd mid there was the strongest evidence of the It
age of the child, for the cost of his knickerbocker suit was ft.
only 12s. Gd. The two questions for the consideration of It
the court were—first, the liability of the father ; and 01.
secondly, whether the clothes supplied were ISOCCINPaIiad.
The wife had been obliged to leave her husband's proteo- ,T,
tion on account of his misconduct, and the Master of the ft
Rolls had given the mother the custody of her child.
Mr. Justice Lush—Suppose a father refused to main-
tain his child, could any one supply the child with N.
necessaries and charge the father with it!
Mr. Lloyd said he was by no means clear upon that point. ELis
The mother had an allowance of 25/. per annum, and he
supposed that if she bad not supplied the child with food a.
ft
she could have been summoned for it.
Mr. Justice Lush—tinder what law If the father was IL
alive, and the mother voluntarily undertook the charge of 21
the child, she might be indicted if she failed to supply the
child with nourishment. fK
Mr. Justice Blackburn said that where a mother, having ft,
the ability, voluntarily undertook the custody of • 10
helpless infant, and it died from want of nourishment, she M.
would be liable for manslaughter. 1
10
0
Mr. Keane, for the father, the defendant, contended
Rt
that if the wife had cause to leave her husband on the
ground of adultery, she should have applied tithe Divot*, et BL
Court, which had power to make provision for the child. N.
He contended that in law a father was not bound to sup-
at
10
port his child. He bad a moral duty to maintain him, and .
he was obliged to obey the provisions of the Poor-law le
Act.
Mr. Justice Blackburn said that when • wife waa turned
out of doors by her husband it gave her authority to pledge
his credit for things for which he would not be liable
when she formed part of his househoid. A man might
clothe hie wife in sackcloth when she was a member of his
family, and she would have no right to pledge the bus-
band's credit for other clothes.
Mr. Justice Lush—When • man turns his wife out of
doors he incurs the liability to support her ; but if he 10
turned his child out he was not bound to support him. too
Mr. Keane said there was no duty imposed on the father
with regard to his child except under the criminal law.
eL
Let the child be retuned. The mother hail made • greet Ito
mistake relative to the husband's conduct. All the father (IL
wanted was both his wife and child back with him, and 20
no one regretted more than he did the mistake which she it.
bad made. When the child was transferred to the mother
she had no more legal obligation cast on her than on the up
father. What necessity or duty was there for clothing too
the child in 7n:vet knickerbockers! It was pleasing, no too
doubt, to set a child so clothed, but there was no oblige• too
tion to so clothe it. It was, however, admitted that the 100
clothes were nut beyond what a child in the parents' pea- t,
tion should wear.
The court A.,,: time to consider its judgment. Eu
The court will to-day sit at nisi prima. St.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE. ,roi
JAN. 31. 10e
(Before the Judge Ordineu7.) loc
as.
EIMARI•3 Z.. EDWAIWA AM, THEuBALD, 0111E3WISZ 8,
tiZAWARD. 84,

After our rtrort left yesterday, to
Dr. Spinkt called witnesses to estahliah • powder 50
charge of hum.): Alt,. agsin.t the husband. 100
Emma Newberry, a shoe-thread winder at Bridport, said r
that she hit 1 4...1 twins by hint eight years ago. They ss.

were both dead.
Crow-examined—Was attended by a midwife, who was U.
dead. The woman at whose house the was confined and St.
her mother were also dead. Did not know where she used Bt.
to meet Mr. Edwards.. It was in the fields. Had had ir
other children since.
Mary Wheatley. a young woman engaged at some twine
works at Bridport, was next called. She said sho knew
the petitioner as a neighbour ; but she knew no harm of
hint. To this statement she remained steadfast, though
shandy questiored.
Elizabeth Bartlett, another girl from Bridport, was also
examined, with the same result.
Rhoda Ilawky, a milliner, had known Captain Edwards
(the petitioner was an officer of volunteers) from • child.
He had met witness last year, and asked her to execute
some work which be wished to have done. Witness sent
' that woili home by cm of her appientices. Did not take it Tet'
I herself, for she had heard scandal, end she wished to walk
Iso that the wicktd people who lived in the town might not a
he able to prove anything against her. The scandal was is.
.1 not that Captain Edwards had kept her—it was merely that lg.
Ihe bad beta seen talking to her in the streets, and she was 60,
anxious to give no further occasion fur gossip. The wit- 16,
ness, who gave her evidence with amazing volubility, ap-
peered to he excessively indignant at having been brought es;'.
to town and placed in the box. BB:
J ones, ales: to the petitioner's attorney's London agent. too,
said he bad taken the examination of Mary Wheatley and 10.
Elizabeth Bartlett, but could not recollect what they said, 80.
as he had examined several witnesses that day. Had pre- 1.1,,°:
posed the " proofs" for counsel, but had done it partly 10.
. from the answers of the witnesses and partly from in- b.
I structions from Bridport. (A laugh.) a,
The Judge Ordinary thought it a pity that Mr. Jones tq
who, to hit honour be it said, had confessed the truth in tit
the box—shouldnot have interfered sooner and prevented
the learned counsel from cross-extooleing the girls as if to,
they had been perjuring themselves. tea
Mr. Thomas Edwards— I believe lam the father of the stn
respondent. (A laugh.) When I found that my nephew II
had disgraced me I wrote to my brother, and asked him V,
to see that justice was done to my daughter. At first he '
41
could nut believe that his son was guilty, and my nephew
denied it, but at length he admitted the truth, and the g
marriage was agreed upon. I aid not agree to keep r
my daughter after her marriage. After the wedding T
took place tl,o couple came to my house. A
room was provided for them, but, to my surprise, the
petitioner welt away. He gave no reason to me for his
conduct. I saw him again the next day. Then he went
away fur a fortnight. and when I saw hint the next time 1
he told me that the reason of his absence was indisposi- I
tion. The next I heard of him was that he had enlisted
in the 1 :th Lirlit Dragoons. After the purchase of his
discharge, I took my daughter and her child to Bridport,
but but could see neither the petitioner or his father.
staying some days at Bridport I left in disgust. I sent an
account to the petitioner for his wife's support • but be
took no notice of it. I did intend to issue a writ against
him, but I was advised that he was not worth powder and
shot.
The case was not concluded.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.-JAI. 31.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Winslow.)

IN RE RICHARD THONAIL-LARGE FAILURE IN THiROILDING

?RAD&

The bankrupt was a builder. formerly of Clreus-road,
now of Wellington-rood, St. Joku'owood. This was a
sitting for examination and discharge. The bankrupt
owes to unsecured creditors 11. KW. ; to those holding
security, 101,4 KW. The property held as security °mists
of houses in the neighbourhood of St. John's-wood, and
is returned as of the value of 116,414'.

On the application of Mr. Sykes, who appeared for the
official assigLee (nu trade assignee having been appointed),
an adjournment was ordered, for investigation of that:shams
of morsgagees and other creditors.

- - - - -
THE POLICE COURT&

THAIM3.

William OPlham & pugilist, was brought up in enstody
of Inspector Floertion, of the C division, before Kr. Paget,
charged with being concerned with Michael Gannon and
others in assaulting Daniel Taylor, an le spector of Thames
police, on board a steamboat, at the Tunnel Pier, on the
morning of Wednesday, the '22nd of January.
The prisoner Gannon, and a lot of rough. and thieves,
were on their way to a prizefight in Long Reach on the
morning in question, and called in at the Tunnel Pier at
ft o'clock in the morning to receive more passengers.
Taylor went on board and warned the captain that ha wsa
acting illegally. A cry was raised to throw him overboard,
and Inspector Taylor was forced towards the fore sponson,
and an attempt made to put him into the water. His
legs were over the rail, and he would Lave been drowned
in deep water and cut to pieces by the paddles of the
steamer, had not some one fortunatzly called out, "Don't
do that." The steamer was then put back, and the in.
tor forced out on to the barge alongside the pier.
The boat and its freight then proce‘ded down the river.
Mr. Paget remanded the pnsoner until Monday next.

THE SUPERIOR Cot Trrs.—The Court of Qucen's
Bench will hold sittings out of term to-day, Monday, the
3rd, Tuesday. the lth; Monday, the 10th inst.; and also
on the 17th, for the purpose of Firing judgment in MOM
pending. At the commencement of the sittings the coon
will first take the cases in the country new trial paper
except those tried before the Lord Chief Justice, wbo will
be sitting at ski prin., and so unable to attend in banoo.
The Court of Exchequer will hold sittings on Friday, the
7th ; Baturd►y, the Bth ; Monday, the 10th ; Tuesday the
Ilth ; and Nt ednesilsy, the 12th lust, and will at such
sittings proceed in disposing of the business then
pending in the paper of new trills and in the special
paper ; and will also bold a sitticg on Friday, the 28th
inst., and will then proceed to give judgment in trotters
standing for Judgment