The Sun.
London, England, 1864-05-14 00:00:00

TIM SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MAY 14, 1864.

LAW INTELLIGENCE—This Day.

COURT OF DIVORCE.
(Before the Judge Ordinary and a Common Jury.)

COOKE V. COOKE AND ALLEN.
This was a petition presented by the husband, but the
expenses of the witnesses not having been paid they refused
to give evidence, and the petition was dismissed with costs.

LIDDIAT V. LIDDIAT AND HOLLAND.
This was the petition of the husband, who was in the
employ of his father, a builder, at Chalford, near Stroud,
praying for a dissolution of marriage, on the ground of hia
wife's adultery with the co-respondent.
It appeared from the evidence that the parties were
married in 1847, and cohabited for some years, but the re-
spondent having contracted habits of intemperance, a sepa-
ration took place about eight years ago, the petitioner mak-
ing her a weekly allowance until he discovered circumstances
that led to his discontinuance of it in 1832. The respon-
dent afterwards admitted to the clergyman of the parish
that she had been leading a dissolute life.
The respondent denied the adultery, and recriminated the
charge, and alleged misconduct on the part of tke husband.
The witnesses to prove the petitioner's allegations having
been called,
Jane Minchin was called for the defence. In her cross-
examination by the petitioner's counsel, she said she knew
Mrs. Lidoiatt very well, but she had never seen her guilty
of anything she considered criminal. She had never seen her
conduct herself like young lovers do. (Laughter.) She
had seen her at a Christmas party, and then she permitted
persons to kiss her, but she did not consider there was
much in that, although she should not permit such
familiarity herself. (Laughter.) Some people were very
fond of kissing—(laughter)—but she didn't see much in its
(Laughter.)

Another witness was also called, but his evidence only
tended to stregthen the petitioner's case.

The Judge-Ordinary,in summing up, told the jury the
Court invariably looked jealously into the circum-
stances surrounding cases like the present one, be-
cause it was of the highest importance, where it was
alleged peace and happiness had been destroyed by the wife,
to ascertain that the husband had done nothing to contribute
tawards such an end himself. The evidence for the petitioner
appeared satisfactorily to prove that the husband had not
deserted his wife without reasonable cause, because it was
not attempted to be disproved that he had forgiven her un-
fortunate propensity for drink over and over again, and
endeavoured to do all in his power to cure her of it. With
respect to other allegations in the petition he did not think
there could be much question about that.
The Jury, after a short deliberation, found a vereict in
favour of the petitioner, stating that he had not deserted his
wife without reasonable cause, and that she was guilty of
the other allegations in the petition,
Decree nisi, without costs.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
Mr Commissioner Fane was the commissioner of the day,
but there were no cases in the list, and it was somewhat
remarkable that there was not even an application for re-
lease from custody, an event which is worth note, for since
the new act came into operation scarcely a court day has
passed over without several being made. This cannot be
occasioned by any arrangement made for the holidays not
provided for by the act of Parliament, which only allows
"Easter Monday and Tuesday," but goes to show that im-
prisonment for debt is less frequent, or that the debtors
intend waiting their release at the monthly visitation of
the Registrar, or until assignees have been chosen, as the
commissioners, Ilmost as a rule,' refuse to grant a release
until that time.

Mr. Registrar Murray disposed of a few cases of judgment
debtor summonses under the Small Debts Act, but which;
were not of the slightest interest.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE—This Day,

MARLBOROUGH STREET.

JUVENILE DETECTIVES,.—THE HOLE TN THE COAT.—
Charles Cavendish, barber, and John Williams, tailor, were
charged with stealing from the person of Mrs Sarah
Robbins, at present staying at 51k, New Bond-street, a
purse containing the sum of £l9s 21d.
Mrs Robbins said that on the previous evening, about
6 o'clock, while looking in a shop window in Regent-street,
the prisoners mad another man came and placed themselves
close to her, one on each side, and the other behind her.
Directly after a little boy told her that they had taken her
purse, and on putting her hand into her pocket she missed
it. She went with the little boy, and afterwards saw
tho two prisoners in custody, tho third man having
escaped. A half-crown found on Williams she could swear
to as having had in her purse which was in her dress
pocket.

Mr Knox advised Mrs Robbins not to carry her purse in
her dress pocket for the future—it was a dangerous practice.
George Minny, a boy about 12 years of age, said that
while in Regent-street the previous evening with another
boy, he saw the prisoners and another man try to pick a
lady's pocket, and then not being able to do so, go up to the
prosecutrix and take her purse out of her pocket: He told
the prosecutrix and the other boy, and the prosecutrix went
with him to a policeman.

Thos. Thompson, a companion of the last witness, said
that seeing the prisoners and the other man trying to pick
a lady's pocket, he said to the last witness, "Let's watch
them, mate," and they did so, and eaw them go up and
pick the prosecuteix's pocket. Williams was the one who
picked the pocket, and there was a hole in the left hand
pocket of his coat. He told his mate that he would keep
his eye on the prisoners, while he went with the prosecu-
trix and spoke to a policeman, and shortly after the police-
man came back with the prisoners.

Fish, 331 A, said the first boy pointed out the prisoners,
and he went after them, when they set to running. They
were stopped by a gentleman, and he took them with assist-
ance into custody. There was a hole in the left hand
pocket of Williame's cost.

Thomas Cole, 220 C, also said there was a hole in the left
hand pocket of Williams's coat.
Barns, the gaoler, examined Williams's coat, but could
find no hole in the left hand pocket, but it subsequently
turned out that Cavendish was wearing two coats, and that
the underneath one was the one worn last night by Williams
with whom he had exchanged one of his coats. j
Mr Knox remanded the prisoners.

WILLS AND BEQUESTS,

(From the Illustrated London News.)
The will of Dowager Lady Cholmeley, relict of the late
Sir Montague Cholmeley, Bad., of Easton Hall, Grantham,
Lincolnshire, was proved in London under £14,000 perso-
nalty—the executors being Henry D. Cholmeley, Esq., her
stepson, and Albert Way, Esq„ her nephew. The will and
a codicil are dated March 2, 1857, The testatrix, after
leaving several small legacies—including 19 guineas to the
poor of each of the parishes of Easton, Burton Coggles,
and Skillington (all in Lincolnshire), and a like sum to the
school at Denham, Buckinghamshire, and legacies to her
servants—divides a sum of £5,000 between her sister, Anne
Way, and nephew, Holroyd Way, leaving legacies to the
children of her late brother, the Rev. G, Way, and be-
queathing the residue of her property to her executor, the
said H. D. Cholmeley, for his own use and benefit.
The will of Thomas Smith, Esq., of Chilton Lodge,
Wilts, was prorel in London under £120,000 personalty,
Thomas Chaloner Smith, Esq,, the son, being the sole
executor. The will and first codicil were executed in 1862,
a second and a third codicil in 1863. The testator has left
his property amongst his sons and daughter; bequeathing
his shares in various companies to his second and third
sons, and a pecuniary legacy to his daughter. The Salford
brewery and buildings to his fourth son, Richard James.
His rectorial tithes and the residue of his property, real and
personal, he leaves to his eldest son.
The will of William Lyddon, Esq., of Carey-street, Lin-
coln's Inn, was sworn under £35,000 personalty; and that
of Thomas F. Maples, Esq., of Frederick-place, Old Jewry,
and Hornsey, £25,000.
The will of Lieutenant-Colonel Gabriel Burer, of Ly-
mington, Southampton, was proved in the London Court
under £20,000 personalty. The executors nominated are
his two nephews, Charles Esse and Frederick Esse, Esqrs.,
and Henry B. Farnall, Esq. The will and codicil are
dated 1853, and a second codicil 1862 ; the whole are in the
Colonel's own handwriting. The will is attested by Rear.
Admiral Thomas Symonds, C. 8., and I. Falls, A. 8., clerk.
The testator has bequeathed to his wife a life interest in
the whole of his property, saving his ready money, cash at
his banker's and army agents', which he leaves to her for
her own absolute use; and, upon her decease, he leaves
certain legacies to her nephews, and the residue of the pro•
perty to his own nephews and nieces, and other relatives.