The Sun.
London, England, 1852-04-01 00:00:00

N.E., fresh.—Arrd. Constance, Africa for Hamburgh;
Cora, Pernambuco for Copenhagen; Giraldo, Havannah
for Hambugh ; Virginia, New Orleans for Stettin. Arrd.
from the River and sailed. Missionary, Mauritius; Clara,
San Francisco; Token, Pernambuco; Mina, Tobago;
Ewerretta, Grenada; Catherine Elizabeth. St. Vincent;
Catherine, St. Kitt's; Moro Csstle, Halifax; Frigia,
Quebec. Sld. Magellan, Hong-Kong; Tartar, Cape of
Good Hope; Louies, Monte Video.
LITERPO ,L, MARCH 31.—Wind E.S.E.—Arrd. Re-
ginald, Heller. Calcutta; Alexander, Grant, New Or-
• leans; Sea King, New Orleans; Greenoch, Mobile;
Switz adand, Charleston; Arctic steamer, New York.
Sld. Crisis. Shanghai; Cheverell, Ceylon; Prince
Arthur, Halifax.
COWES, MAROEI N.L.—Arrd. Columbus,
Rio Janeiro for Gothenburg.
PORTSMOUTH, MARCH 31.—Her Majesty's steamer
Antelope took the ground on Bambridge Ledge during
a fog this morning, and remains. Assistance has been
sent to her.
POOLE, MARCH 31.—The Lark, from Cowes, has
been towed in very leaky, and cargo thrown overboard,
having been on the sand at the entrance of the harbour.
YARMOUTH, MARCH 31.—The Lydia has come cif
the beach with damage.
FALSIOUTII, MARCH 31.—Wind
Anna Christina, Rio Janeiro. Off port, Eclipse, Mau-
ritius; Helena, Rio Janeiro for Altona ; Alexander,
Baltimore for Rotterdam.
PENZANCE.—And. Baron, Malta to London, part of
crew mutinous.
BRISTOL, MARCH 31.—Wind N. E.—Arrd. Araby
Maid, Mauritius; Saldanha Bay. Sld. Surrey, Port
Philip, and Sydney, New South Wales.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—(THIS DAY.)
BATLEY'S DIVORCE.
Their Lordships sat to-day at eleven o'clock, for the
• purpose of hearing evidence in support of this Bill.
The Peers present were the Lord Chancellor, Lord
Brougham, Lord Srangford, and the Bishop of Norwich.
---- Mr. MEREWETHER, on behalf of the petitioner,
stated tee- cass. ThA petitioner was the son of a respect-
able job-master, and Mrs. ESSLIcy, from whom he sought
to be divorced, had, previous to her marriage -wisti-ssiss,
• been a sempatress. Her name was then Miss Newton.
The parties having been for some time previously se-
lf quainted, were, on the 9th of October, 1848, married
at St. John's, Waterloo-road, without the consent or
knowledge of the father of the petitioner, he being then
only nineteen years of age. Mr. Batley, sen., on being
acquainted by a letter from his son that he bad married
the daughter of Captain Newton, of Tunbridge Wells,
▪ went down to that place to make inquiries, but was un •
able to discover any such person at Tunbridge Wells.
This he communicated to his son, and the consequence
was that an immediate separation took place between
the parties. An allowance of 7e. a week was afterwards
paid to Mrs. Batley by her husband, she having sum-
moned him before a police magistrate to provide her
with a maintenance. It appeared, however, that she
afterwards fell into evil courses, and her husband having
discovered her in an act of adultery, instituted a suit
against her in the Ecclesiastical Court for separation, in
Which he had been successful, and had subsequently
taken these further steps to obtain a complete divorce.
The Learned Counsel then proceeded to call witnesses.
Mr. F. Owen, a clerk in the Ecclesiastical Court,
proved the serving of the requisite notices and a copy
of the bill on Mrs. Batley.
Mr. a Cleaver, parish clerk of St. John's, Waterloo-
road, produced a copy of the register of the marriage of
the parties on the 9th of Oct , 1848.
Mrs. Anne Humphries, examined by Mr. MEREWE-
' THER—Was present at the marriage of Mr. Batley and
Mira Newton. I knew both parties before the marriage.
Miss Newton lived in my house, she was a sempstress,
and earned her living by taking in needlework from dif-
ferent shops.
By the Lord CHANCELLOR—She was a little gay, but
I never saw her guilty of any immoral conduct while she
resided with me.
By Lord BROUGHAM—She kept early hours, and al-
ways came alone. My house was always a well-con-
ducted one. The petitioner frequently visited her for
More than a year before their marriage, and after the
marriage they both came back to my house,
where they remained a week, until the petitioner lett
Mrs. Batley and did not return.
Mr. R. Batley, examined by Mr. MEREWETHER—I
am the father of the petitioner. His marriage took
place without my consent or knowledge. He was not
then twenty. I learned it by a letter from himself on the
same day, in which he informed me that he bad married
the daughter of Captain Newton, Clarence-terrace,
Tunbridge Wells. On the 16th of October I went
down to Tunbridge Wells. I found a Clarence-terrace,
but no Captain Newton, nor did I discover any such
Person in the whole town. Informed my son of the re-
sult of my inquiries.
Mr. Lewis Martinelli, examined by Mr. MERE-
WETIIER—I am a coach-builder in Albany-street,
Regent's.park, and on the 16th October. 1848, I ac•
oompanied Mr. Batley in his unsuccessful search after
Captain Newton. We found no such person there.
On the 6th of June, 1849, I went with the petitioner
and a person named Barnes, to Brook-street, Newing-
,ton• We took our station opposite a particu-
lar house in that street, where we waited
a considerable time until we saw a man and woman en-
ter together. In a short time we followed them in, and
went up to the first floor, where we knocked, and a fe-
male voice cried out, " Who's there?" Barnes answered,
It's me." The voice cried out again, " Who's me?"
Barnes answered, " It's me—Tom." Young Batley,
however, put his shoulder to the door, forced it open,
and we all three entered. We there found a man and
woman in bed together. The man leaped out of bed and
put himself in a fighting attitude. [By Lord BROUGHAM
—lle had only his shirt on. J The woman on seeing us
covered her head with her clothes, and on Barnes and
Batley trying to uncover her to see who sho was, she
slid down under the clothes till she came out at the hot-
. tom of the bed. She was also undressed. I saw her
distinctly, and I have no doubt she was the same woman
that we had seen enter the house shortly before. I also
saw her afterwards in Brunswick-street, Hackney-road,
where I went with the elder Mr. Batley. She then
answered to the name of Mrs. Batley.
By the LORD CHANCELLOR—After we had identified
Mrs. Batley we left her in the room along with the man
whom we had discovered with her, and set no further
watch on her. We had been in Brook-street on a pre-
cious evening on a similar errand, but without success.
Mr. T. Barnes examined by Mr. MEetwEneelt—l
accompanied the last witness and Mr. Batley to the house
in Brook-street. When we entered the room we saw a
man and woman in bed together. The man jumped out
of bed, and Mr. Batley cried out to him, " You're in bed
with my wife." I helped Mr. Batley to pull down the
bed clothes, to see who the woman was. I had never
seen her before, nor have I since.
Lord BROUGHAM observed that there was yet no satis-
factory evidence to show that the woman found .there
was Mrs. Batley.
_Mr. MEREWETHER reminded their Lordships that the
witness Martinelli had identified the woman as the same
person he had afterwards seen in Brunswick-street, who
answered to .the name of Mrs. Batley. The Learned
Counsel then recalled—
Mrs. Humphries, who said that she had answered
the door when Mr. Martinelli called, and had shown
Ihim into
, room where Mrs. Batley was. Thej person he there saw was Mrs. Batley.
_ Sergeant Bassett, L 9, deposed that the particular
house named was, and had been, for a considerable time
a common brothel.
This was the evidence in support of the Bill.
oftectd
tßnotoseux suggested that no evidence had been
birth an: show that Mrs. Batley had misrepresented her
Mr. militsrentage, as was imputed.
donanaVETHER said that there would be a diffi-
culty
Mrs.Batley :t/utdhis, and the communication was between
to call him to prove
husband, and it would he impossible
Lord BliorcruAxe
it
of last session he thought it would be competent for him
jun , atshae witness.
to call the
Mr. Batley,
Petitioner , was then called,
but an after thougt;t, having
-urred to the Noble and
Learned Lord, that actionusgof°cerim. con. and h f
promise of marriage were specifically
excepted,breac be was
not examined.
The allowance made to
of 7s. per week, and
Mr. Batley, senior, recalled_
Mrs. B ttley was
of November, 1849. dated from the 9th
to him to he
least take time
s The ORD CHANCELLOR sai it p"
necsasaLry that their Lordshipsd shouap ld at d
to consider, if not also require some further ovi
this case. No evidence whatever had beenternnee in
ught
before their Lordships, to chew any impropriety
duct before her marriage which could Justify the el-
tioner in separating from her so early as he bad rtte-.
The petitioner himself had been guilty of some decep.
tion in representing himself of full age at the time of.
his marriage, and it was a remarkable fact, that the age
of Mrs. Batley had been studiously kept out of Sighs,
and they had, therefore, a right to assume, taking that
fact together and also the absence of evidence to
prove previous misconduct, that she was not of an
ago such as would lay her open to the charge
of having taken advantage of the inexperience of a
youth, and succeeded by her artfulness in entrapping
him into a marriage. There was no evidence in the
cause to show any reason for, or to justify, the sudden
separation—separation he would not call it, but rather
desertion, for that was a more fitting term—the desertion
of a wife by a husband a few days after marriage,
without the slightest ground of complaint. When
thes husband pursued such a course as this what
e
_as le could be expected but what bad followed. How
rth e roman to live? On the 4th of November fol-
lowing_
she was driven to summon the husband who had
deserted her before a ma • gistrate to compel him to pro-
vide her with a maintenance, and then, and then only,
he made a provision for her tothehamhoudnt cf. 7s. a
week—a shilling a day for a woman,
tgivendup
her business, thrown herself out of emwpalnoirosean
to pat herself under the protection lartorofer
husband who had deserted her so soon after. support
fol-
loweda was but the necessary course of' this. He was
not wishing to excuse the wife's acts, they were inex-
cusable; but ho thought the consequences which had
happened were almost inevitable. His Lordship then
proceeded to comment on the conduct of the petitioner
and hin friends in keeping so Stricta watch
over the conduct of Mrs. Batley until they had disco-
vered her in the act of adultery, and as soon as they
had obtainod that desired result, leaving her to follow
her own course, without taking any steps to ascertain
tho name of the man with whom she was found. The
present case required very great consideration; on his
part that consideration would be given to it, and it the.pe-
titioner had. any further evidence to adduce, an Opportu-
nity would bra afforded him to do so.
Lord 13aoveuaer entirely c incurred with what had
fallen from Isis Noble and Learned Friend. Be should
strongly rem munend that if the petitioner had any further
STideuo, he should not fail to produce it, moollllo'