The Sun.
London, England, 1865-03-03 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE—This Day.

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

FRA.DIN V. FRADIN AND DEGLOS.-DAMAGES, .£lOO.
This was a suit by the husband for a dissolution of mar-
riage on the ground of his wife's adultery with the co-
respondent, and he claimed damages. The respondent
entered an appearance, but did not traverse the allegation,
and the co-respondent did not appear. _ _

Mr. Price, Q.C., and Mr. J. P. Murphy were counsel for
the petitioner.

From the statement of counsel it appeared that the peti-
tioner was a cook in the family of Lord Sidney, and the
respondent was a milliner, and it appeared that originally
they had resided at Rouen. They came to London in
1851, and the petitioner entered his present service.
He took lodgings for his wife, who obtained a situa-
tion as forewoman at a milliner's at the West
End, and was frequently visited by her husband,
who treated her with attention and kindness. They con-
tinued on friendly terms until 1861, when the respondent
pretended she was going to Paris, and went to live with
her paramour, who was described as a wine merchant.
The petitioner's suspicions wore aroused, and he commenced
the present proceedings.
John Lavaneby, a milliner, in business at New
Burlington-street, said the respondent was in his em-
ployment, and, according to the regulations of his
establishment, she was prohibited from sleeping out
of the house. She was visited by the husband, who ap-
peared to be very fond of the respondent. For some time
the latter conducted herself with apparent propriety, but in
1861 she was in the habit of sleeping out, and on being re-
monstrated with, made some frivolous excuses. Being
dissatisfied with her conduct, he dismissed her, and he had
no further knowledge of her movements.
This evidence was corroborated by some other witnesses,
who also proved the adultery having been committed at
Brompton in the year 1861 and 1862 by parties answering
the description of the respondent and the co-respondent.
In addition to the facts already stated, it appeared that
the respondent had obtained a large sum of money from
her husband to assist him in getting into business at the
time she was alleged to have been living in adultery.
The learned judge considered that further evidence as
to the identity of the parties was necessary, which it was
understood would be forthcoming to-morrow.
The jury assessed the damages at £lOO.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Holroyd.)
IN RE LOUIS ELKAN.

This bankrupt was described as a merchant of Mincing-
lane, and to-day he came up to pass his last examination,
The accounts show debts £3,400, and assets £2,200.

Mr. Spyer appeared for the assignees, and was not in-
structed to oppose. The examination had been adjourned
.until to-day in order that a cash and goods account might
be filed, and this was now done. All the items appeared
to be vouched; but while the assignees did not object to
the bankrupt's passing his last examination, they asked
that the order of discharge might stand over till a future
day.

Mr. Murray, for the bankrupt, did not object to this, and
the case was adjourned.

IN RE FORSTER-THE EDITOR AND THE MIDLAND BANKING