The Sun.
London, England, 1852-05-17 00:00:00

u birtif Xttitton,

SUN OFFICE, Seven o'Clock.

TATTERSALL'S.--THIS EVENING

Six O'CLOCK.

DERBY.
6 to 1 agat Hobble Noble
8 to 1 agst Alcoran
9 to 1 agst Harbinger—taken
10 to 1 agst Little Harry—taken
10 to 1 agst Claverhouse
1,4 to 1 apt Alfred the Great
16 to 1 agst Kingston—taken
20 to 1 Opt A ng,ar
22 to 1 agst King of Trumps
38 to 1 agat Elcot
50 to 1 agst Nabob

OARS.
6 to 1 agst Red Hind
7 to 1 agst Songstress
10 to 1 agst Gossamer
10 to 1 agst Attack

SONEESETSHIRE STAKES.
5 to 2 agst Hugo
6 to 1 agst Grated Duchess
to 1 agst Chief Justice
Exeter is scratched.

HAWKINS'S DIVORCE-
HOUSE OF LORDS.—(THIS DAY.)
This Bill, the second reading of which was postponed
sine die from the 3d of Aprila last, for the purpose of
supplying additional evidence, was taken into farther
consideration this day at half-past three. The Peers
present were the Lord Chancellor, the Bishop of Nor-
wich, and Lord Redesdale.
Evidence was offered of the payment of the damages,
amounting to 7361. 165., recovered in the action of crim.
con., brought by Lieutenant Hawkins against Lord
Malden.
(Mr. Warren, captain of the barque the Earl of Durham,
was called to
prove the precise day on which Lieutenant
Hawkins sgiled from England to Halifax (16th May,
1850) in charge of his detachment.
Ellen Young, lady's-maid to Mrs. Hawkins, proved
that she had been with her mistress daring the whole
of the period of Lieutenant Haskins's absence, and that
during the whole of that time Mrs. Hawkins had not left
England. She had been in the habit of undressing her
mistress every night up to the time of the birth of the
child, but she had never once suspected her of being in
the family-way,
The LORD CHANCELLOR, in moving the second read-
ing of the Bill, said that an extraordinary fact in this
case was that the state in which Mrs. Hawkins was at
the time her husband returned to England had entirely
escaped the notice of all the persons among
whom she lived. Lieutenant Hawkins had left
England on the 16th of May, 1850, and had
not returned until the 23d of March, 1851, and it was
quite impossible that he could have been the father of.
the child born on the 2d of June, 1851. That an act of
adultery bad taken place in his absence was, under all
the circumstances, without doubt; and taking into con-
sideration that the time of delivery so exactly coincided
with the particular period when the supposed act of
adultery had been alleged to have taken place, there
was no doubt that it did take place in the early part of
September, at the place which had been indicated in the
evidence. The most singular circumstance, however,
was that Lieutenant Hawkins himself should not have
been aware of the state in which his wife was when he
rejoined her in England, sad if this part of the case
were not most completely proved, their Lordships
would not give a second reading to this Bill
without serious furthertonsideration. It appeared that
Mrs. Hawkins had already had two children, and her
husband had therefore cohabited with her during two
pregnancies; and yet on his return to this country ho
appeared to have renewed his relations with her in the
ordinary way without evincing the slightest suspicion,
and—it having been proved that there was but one bed
in their room—had continued to sleep with her
up to, he might say, a quarter of an hour before the
birth of the child. It certainly did strike him as being
moat extraordinary that, • although it had escaped
the notice of everybody about her, yet Lieutenant
Hawkins himself should have not, up to the actual
birth of the child, have once suspected that his wife
was in the family-way. What took place when
Mrs. Hawkins was delivered seemed to him to be
conclusive on this point. They found Mrs. Hawkins,
after the event had happened, entreating the landlady of
the hotel where it occurred not to break it too suddenly
to Lieutenant Hawkins, as he was subject to a heart
complaint, and it might kill him, and they found, too,
that the effect of the blow on Lieutenant Hawkins was
to leave him in a miserably wretched state, stunned
by the terrible news which he had heard for
the first time. He (the Lord Chancellor) had therefore
come to the conclusion thatLient. Haskins was wholly un-
conscious of the fact that his wife was in the family-way,
and he thought, therefore, that this was a case in which
he could with confidence recommend their Lordships to
give a second reading to this Bill, thereby giving Lieut.
Hawkins the Irmedy to which he was entitled.
The Bill was then read a second time.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

(THIS EVENING.)

HOUSE OF LORDS:

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Wool
sleek at Five o'clock.

The Duke of ARGYLL presented a petition from
Edinburgh in favour of the inspection of nunneries.

COMMON LAW PROCEDURE.

Ift reply to Lord LYNDHURST,
Lord CAMPBELL said the Committee on the Com-
mon Law Procedure Bill, which he ecusidered would
effect very great improvements in the administration of
the law, would sit to-morrow and proceed with the con-
sideration of the Bill.