The Sun.
London, England, 1864-06-09 00:00:00

MISCELLANEOUS—Continued.
International Financial society, lim., 10/ f
International Land Credit. lim., 41
Italian Irrigation (Canal Cavour , 61
Ditto, 6 per cent. Bonds, redem. 1870, issued 90, 86
Joint Stock Discount lim., 71
London and Caledonian ‘larine, lim., 5i
London General Omnibus Company, 2i
New Zealand Trust and Loan, 24
Panama, New Zealand, and Australian R. Hai' , lim., 71
Quebrada Land, Rail, and Mining, Um., 3i
Smith, Knight, an I Co., Rm., 5i 5
Societe Finauciere d'Egypte, lim.,
South African Mortgage and Investment, lim., 6R- i ¢
Trust and Agency of Australasia, lira., 2

LAW INTELLIGENCE —(This Day. )

-.0. - - --

Mr Rolt contended that they did not refer to any promise
of marriage, but to the intercourse which had taken place
' between them, as well as to a promise by Major Yelverton
that he would spend all his " leaves " and other oppor-
tunities in Miss Longworth's company. it would be a
violation of language to construe them into a promise of
marriage. Another ground for urging that there had been
no promise of marriage might be found in the fact that
it was kept secret from Major Yelverton's relations. Shc
complained of his cold letters and his unloving nature,
which could not have proceeded from a woman who was
under promisa of marriage, with whom certainly there
would have been some expression of hope and comfort. She
complained, too, that Major Yelverton was a vampire who
had sucked away from her the blessings of life; which
could hardly Je the expression of an expectant wife. In one
letter the respondent asked for the bonbon which had

been promised to her when she first submitted, but that
clearly did not refer to any promise of marriage, but to the
intercourse which had long subsisted between them.

The Lord Chancellor, referring to one of the letters, said
the respondent spoke of the happy days she and Major Yel.
verton had spent in the little room, five stories high, in
Princes-street, Edinburgh. What did that mean ?
Mr Rolt said it might allude to the intercourse which
took place between theth.
The Lord Chancellor,inquired whether Mrs Gamble, who
appeared to be the landlady, knew anything ab,-,ut it ?
Mr Rolt—The landlady might wink at it.
Lord Chelmsford—The landlady very fiercely denied any-
thing of the sort.
Mr Rolt replied that all landladies did.
Lord Chelmsford—lt was not to be assumed that the
matter necessarily came to the landlady's knowledge at all.
Mr Rolt—Not necessarily, of course. The learned gen•
tleman then proceeded to read voluminous extracts from the
correspondence, with a view to support his statement that
there never had been any promise of marriage.
Mrs Yelverton and her two friends arrived at half-past
twelve. They were escorted to the reporters' gallery by
one of the ushers of the house. She looked somewhat care-

worn, and listened to the arguments which were urged
against her with the greatest possible attention, unpleasant

as many cf them must necessarily have been. At the far•

ther end of the house ladies were admitted with opera
glasses with which they endeavoured to stare Mrs Yelver-
ton out of countenance. She was, however, to a great ex-
tent protected from this rudeness by the gentlemen who
were in front of her who were taking notes of the case.
Mr Rolt continued his arguments, and said he should not
trouble their lordships with the details of the Scottish mar-
riage, which would be argued by his learned friend Mr
Anderson.

Lord Wensleydale—What about the Irish marriage ?
-13 not that raised in issue here ?
Mr Rolt—Oh yes, it is.

Lord Wensleydale—lf there was a marriage at all, any
where, it would be an important element in the inquiry.
Mr Rolt said he would endeavour to meet that point.
The inquiry was proceeding when our report left.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Fane.)
IN RE T. LEIGH.

This was a meeting for last examination and discharge
of this gentleman, described as of Brompton, barrister-at-
law, Ha is also one of the police magistrates at Worship-

e►treet.

Mr H. Linklater said that an adjournment would be ne.
cessary, as no accounts had yet been filed, and an adjourn.
ment was taken for two mouths by consent.

IN RE ROBINS AND PRIEST.

These bankrupts were auctioneers in St. Martin's-lane,
and the application for orders of discharge was strongly
opposed and fully reported from time to time as the case
proceeded.

His Honour now gave judgment, but did not enter into
any details. He said that the case had been before the
Court a very long time, and had been argued at very great
length. He thought there was a great distinction in the
two cases, and the order of discharge of Priest would be
suspended for eight months, and that of Robins for two
months, but protection would be granted.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT—This Day.

OLD COURT.
(Before Mr. Baron Bramwell.)
Henry TiTcodison, a coachman„ surrendered to an indict-
ment charging him with manslaughter.
The jury returned a verdict of guilty.
The Learned Judge said, under the peculiar circumstances
of the case he should only sentence him to a week's im-
prisonment.

The trial of Robert Boyle Miller, a captain in the mer-
chant service, who stands indicted for embezzling the sum
of £4,000, the property of his employers, Messrs. Ryland
and Co., Liverpool, shipowners, was postponed until next
sessions,

NEW COURT.
(Before the Common Sergeant.)
Joseph Harris, 34, trimming weaver, and Jarvis Sharp,
were indicted for burglariomly breaking and entering the
dwelling-house of Henry Webb, and stealing therefrom
a quantity of wearing apparel.

The jury found both prisoners guilty.
The Common Sergeant, in sentencing the prisoners,
commented strongly on the conduct of each, and ordered
Herrin to 9 months' and Snarp to 18 months' imprisonment,
with herd labour,

THIRD COURT.
THE ALLEGED MANSLAUGHTER IN THE NEW-CUT.
Sarah Weston, 32, widow, was indicted for the man.
slaughter of Stephen Weston,

It will be recollected that the prisoner and the deceased
resided in Johanna-street, New-cut, and led a cat and dog
sort of life in consequence of the intemperance of the pri-
soner. Frequent quarrels took place between them, and
cn Sunday morning, the 15th ult., it was alleged by one of
the witnesses that the prisoner had a quarrel with her hus-
band, and after pulling him out of bed she knocked his head
several times against the floor, and on the arrival of the
surgeon life was extinct. One of the daughters of the
prisoner, who was in the room when the circumstance oc-
curred, said her mother did not strike her father's head on
the ground at all. She only endeavoured to pick him up
and put him into bed, as he had been noisy and out of his
mind all day. The surgecn who had made a post mortem
examination of the body of deceased, said he found many
superficial bruises, but they were not sufficient to affect
vitally, and that a person struggling violently in delirium
tremens might, if forcibly held down, sink back and die from
exhaustion. There were marks of severe injuries on his
head, as if from some blunt instrument. Tho two seen by
the witness Samuels, however, would not, in his opinion,
have been sufficient to cause death.
The jury retarncd a verdict of Not Guilty.

Thiscon(quded the business of the session.

ENGLISH TRAVELLERS IN PRUSSIA.—The Police
President of Aix la-Chapelle has issued a solemn protest
against the statement made by an English journal that
English travellers are insulted in journeying through
Pa ussia. A. German paper alleges that the assertion& have
been published by the English innkeepers with a view to
prevent intending travellers from proceeding abroad,

• HOUSE OF LORDS.
YELVEI,TON V. LONGIVORTR (OR YELVERTON).
Present —T.t. e Lord C bane ellor, Lard Brougham, Lord
Chelmsford, Lord Kingsdown, and Lord Wensleydale.
This moraine this case was proceeded with.
Mr. holt, Q.C., for the appEllant (Major Yelverton) con-
tinued his address, reading lengthened extracts from the
reap ndent's letters. She described herself as like the
woman in the Gospel, "troubled about many things." She
had doubts about her health, doubts about herself, doubts
about the continuance of her intimacy with Major Yelver-
ton. She added, "Oh, for the blessed days of happiness
when I hoped we should be one," and said she feared
that having lost the treasure of to-dry she might lose the
blessedness of He hereafter. In all these letters, the learned
counsel argued, there was nothing pointing to a public
marriage, nothing pointing to a marriage at all--negativing,
indeed, the whole idea of marriage. Referring to Major
Yelverton's own letters, he contended that there were only
two which could by any possible construction imply a
promise of marriage ; while, after he was married to another
lady (Nirs. Forbes, who was present in one of the side gal-
leries), the respondent wrote to him to congratulate him on
the fact, and asking for a place in his prayers. That also,
he contended, was a conclusive proof that marriage was
never thought of. There was no proof whatever of
a promise of marriage. With regard to certain cards,
bearing the words, " Mr. and Mrs. Yelverton,"
said to be acknowledged in writing by the ap-
pellant, the learned counsel submitted that the
letter was written in Ireland and received in England,
so that it had nothing to do with the alleged contract of
marriage in Scotland. In one of her letters the respondent
stated that whatever might occur they would remain man
and wife, showing the doubtful position in which they were
placed.
The Lord Chancellor thought the words were "man and
woman still," which would bear a different interpretation,
Mr Rolt said such was the case.
The Lord Chancellor referred to words in one of the
appellant's lettere, in which he stated that he understood
he was released from a promise he made, and wished to
know what was meant by those words ?