The Sun.
London, England, 1862-03-21 00:00:00

211 E CIVIL SERVICJ

The Civil Service esti.Mates 1,2, and 6, for the
year ending March 1, 1863, were issued yesterday
The sum required in class 1 for public works and
buildings is £695,215; being a decrease, as com-
pared with 1861-2, of £139,451. The chief items
of increase are an increase of £54,519 for Holyhead
and Portpatrick harbours, and of £29,158 for public
buildings in Ireland, including Kingstown. harbour.
On almost svery one of the other items there is a
decrease ; for example, a decrease of £63,375 f
g
new Westminster-bridge ;of £50,500 for AV -or
of Parliament; £20,606 for
olfaigohot,hses abroad;
ecou estmrn-
ster-bride approaches; £22,045 for the new Houses
£15,000 for the new Foreign.

LA TV INTELLIGENCE.—March 20.

ROLLS' COURT.
(Before the Master of the Rolls.)
itHE SWINFEN ESTATES.-BROVN 'V. KENNEDY.
This was a suit arising out of the litigation con-
cerning the Swinfen estates, which atEracted so
muck: attention a short time ago. It will be re-
mermbered that the question in that litigation was
ti.,e validity of the late Samuel Swinfen, and that
'an issue to try the question between Mrs. Swinfen
(now Mrs. Broun, the plaintiff in this suit, the
widow of the testator's son) and Captain Swinfen,
'his heir at law, was compromised by the counsel
engaged at the Stafford Assizes, in March, 1856,
said that such compromise was afterwards con-
sidered invalid for want of sufficient authority on
the part of Mrs. Swinfen's counsel, and that ulti-
mately Mrs. Swinfen succeeded in establishing the
validity of the will, and thereby recovered estates
the value of which was stated in this suit to be
about £60,000. Mr. Kennedy acted as Mrs. Swin-
fen's counsel in the litigation which succeeded the
compromise, and the bill in this suit stated that
some months after the litigation had been decided
in Mrs. Swinfen's favour, Mr. Kennedy induced
her to execute a deed, dated the 10th of May,
1859, by which she conveyed all the Swinfen
estates to him in fee simple, subject to a life in-
terest therein reserved to herself, and subject to the
debts which she might owe at her death not exceed-
ing £lO,OOO, and subject to such other sums not ex-
ceedino. £lO,OOO, as she should by will appoint.
This deed recited that Mrs. Swinfen was desirous
to convey to Mr. Kennedy the reversion of the said
estates to recompense him for his services as her
counsel. It seems that, shortly after the date of
this deed, Mr. Kennedy prepared a will for Mrs.
Swinfen, leaving all her real estate to him or to his
children, chargeable with £lO,OOO to be divided
among some of her relations, and subject to such
debts as should be due from her at her death, and
appointing him one of her executors. This will,
however, she did not execute. In December, 1861,
Mrs. Swinfen married Mr. Broun, her co-plaintiff
in this suit, and in January, 1862, Mr. Kennedy
brought an action against Mr. and Mrs. Broun for
services performed for her as counsel and otherwise
in the cause of "Swinfen v. Swinfen," and for
money paid for her, and for money due from her
upon accounts stated. Particulars of demand were
delivered in this action, which were deemed insuf-
ficient, and at length such particulars were reduced
to a claim for £20,000 upon accounts stated in
January and April, 1859, and all the claims in the
action, except that upon accounts stated, were struck
cut of the declaration. It appeared that recently
-Mr. Kennedy had distributed in the county of
Stafford handbills of an offensive character, headed
thus:

Shortly will be published The Serpent of Swinfen, ' "
threatening a publication to show, as it was
expressed, "how the serpent has stung her bene-
factor,"

The bill in this suit was filed to set aside the
deed of the 10th of May, 1859, and the alleged
stated accoants, and for an injunction to restrain
31r. Kennedy from selling or mortgaging the pro-
perty, and from further prosecuting the action, and
from issuing the threatened publication; and the
cause now came on upon an interlocutory motion
for an injunction for these purposes.
Mr. Cole, Q C., and Mr. Kay were for the plain-
tiffs ; Mr. Chapman Barber and Mr. Kennedy in
person
.appeared for the defence ; and, after some
discussion, the motion was directed to stand over
until the first day of Easter Term, upon Mr. Ken-
nedy's undertaking not to deal with any judgment
he might obtain in the action until four days after
the commencement of Easter Term, and giving an
undertaking not to do any of the other acts sought
to be restrained by the notice of motion.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)

HUNT V. HUNT AND HUNT.-CURIOCS CASE.

Sir F. Slade, 4.6;,lindir:Spinks appeared for
the petitioner ; Dr, Phillimore, Q.C., and Mr.
Besley, for the respondent ; Mr. Searle for the co-
respondent.

In 1850 George Hunt, an engineer in the Borough,
married Rebecca Cross. In 1854 he received an
appointment in the navy, and sailed in the Leopard
for the Black Sea, from which he returned in 1856.
Soon afterwards he left England again in the Assis-
tance troop ship for China, and he arranged that
his wife should live, in his absence from England,
with his father at Beaminster, Dorsetshire, and
should receive £3 a month for her maintenance. In
1858 his brother Edward, who paid the allowance,
taxed her with being in the familyway ; but she
denied it, as there was a God above, and attributed
her shape to dropsy. The allowance was, however,
soon afterwards stopped ; Edward Hunt having
satisfied himself that the respondent had committed
adultery with his half-brother, James Hunt, who
also lived at Beaminster. It was deposed that at
first she had a bedroom to herself at old Mr. Hunt's,
but she complained that the house was " trouble-
some"- —that was, haunted by supernatural noises.
(Laughter.) After about three weeks, therefore, she
had her bed removed to the room of her father-in-
law; but she took advantage of a visit paid him by
his daughter, Mrs. Burdett, to leave and to go to
the co-respondent's, who was a widower. While
she was there, Martha Harris, a charwoman, swore
that she had twice surprised her in the very act ;
and that she had given her a shilling and two shifts
not to tell the old man. She was afterwards con-
fined of a child. Two or three months before then
Harris spoke to the co-respondent about it, and he
said, with an oath, " What's the odds ? If I cannot
keep them the parish must."
The respondent afterwards bore the co-respondent
a second child.

For the wife the adultery was admitted, but she
had pleaded several recriminatory charges against
her husband, including one of adultery with her
sister, Jane Cross. To support this allegation, Jane
Cross and another person were called on their sub-
poenas, but they did not appear.
The jury found a verdict for the husband on all
the issues.

The court made a decree nisi. It also granted
decrees in the cases of " Thompson v. Thompson
and Barras," and of " Hall v. Hall and Williams,"
tried yesterday ; but it refused costs in the former
instance.

STOCK V. STOCK AND COX.
Mr. Daly appeared for the petitioner, Mr. Robert
Stock, Rob t
Stock, an engraver, in London. He married ther
respondent in September, 1856, and the charge of
adultery against her was proved by a policeman,
who early one morning saw her gathering flowers
to give to the co-respondent. She said to Cox,
" You may as well come in, Bill, for he's not come
home." Soon afterwards the witness heard her say,
"'Why don't you take off your • boots and come to
bed ?" It was summer, and the window was partly
open. There was no evidence of confessions by the
paramours.
The respondents did not appear. It was stated
that Cox had enlisted as a common soldier.

The jury (who had only been sworn to assess
damages) awarded the petitioner a shilling.
The Judge said they had set a very fair value on
the woman. He then made a decree nisi, with
costs.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE,

HOME CIRCUIT.—MAIDSTONE, March 20.

(Before Lord Chief Justice Erie and a Common Jury.)

BOOTS V. POUTER.

The proceedings in this extraordinary cause were
resumed this morning at eight o'clock.
Mr. Hawkins, Q.C., and Mr. Honeyman again
appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Sergeant Bal-
lantine and Mr. Philbrick for the defendant.

The following additional evidence was adduced :
Mrs. Clifton said—l reside at Notting-hill, and
was a friend of the plaintiff and defendant. I re-
ember Mrs. Porter coming to our house last year.
1 .
n
_..„ver
saw major Ross until he was pointed out
to
tome
. L*
,_ Yesterday Mrs Porter stayed at our house
three Week
there,
sor a month, and Mr. Porter visited her
andh I
requested him to provide lodgings for
her, and he
my house she went
he would do so. When she left
Mr. Thomhea went to live at Kensington.
Lord Chief jenoss was then called.
ustieee Erie interposed, and said that
v
if this witness e examined now it would be
inan
giving evidence swer to the charge of adultery,
and the gentleman could
not be called afterwards.
Mr. Hawkins said thati sat
after this intimation from
},
his lordship he
should
postpone
one the examination of
Main. Ross until we had
the case for the de-
fendant. He then said that the evidence already
given closed the case for the plaintiff.
Sergeant Ballantine then addresßed the jury, and
that hadartsee.ne_ta_kiemn by his
said that the course
Rnas,difl-ne
came to
it
learned friend somewhat emb
appeared to him that Major
all,to
speak the truth, and was to be examined
ate
might as well be examined at first as at the clm
of the case. There could be no doubt that he wase
a most important witness, and he thought that h,
ought to have been called and have told his own
story. HQ, did not care, however, for the course that
had been taken, as he believed that the result,
would be thu samo whether Major Ross was
examined now or at a later stage of the in-
quiry. The defendant had no alternative but to
defend the present action. It was one of a gr.eat
number of a siantilar kind that were brought against
him, solely, as%lhe believed, for the purposes of ex-
tortion, and the father-in-law was made the plain-
tiff, when the proper course to have taken was for
the lady herself to have gone into a court specially
created for the purpose, and where all the abomi-
nable details that bad been brought forward in this

i•

case would have been inquired into. The lady, he'
believed, had in point of fact instituted proceedings
in that court against her husband, with a view
to obtain alimony from him, and pending these pro-
ceedings they were called upon to decide the ques-
tion in this court. He thought the defendant had
a great right to complain of the insinuation that
had been thrown out by his learned friend that the
defendant had conspired with Major Ross to destroy
the character of his wife, and he asserted that there
was not a particle of truth in the suggestion, nor
in the statement as to what had taken place
at Paris. The defence he was instructed to make
was, that the wife of the defendant had been
guilty of adultery with Major Ross, and he
believed he should be able to establish that fact be-
yond the possibility of a doubt. He called the at-
tentlbn of the jury to the demeanour of the lady
while in the witness-box, and to the levity with
which she answered the questions that would have
been almost heartrending to a modest woman, and
said it appeared to him that, even as the case stood
at present, the jury would have no doubt that a
criminal intimacy had existed between the wife of
the defendant and Major Ross. They would both
deny it, of course, and, in eases like these, no other
course could be expected ; but the jury would form
their own conclusions upon the facts before them,
and he should contend that upon these facts no
doubt could exist in the mind of any reasonable
man that an adulterous intercourse had taken place
between them. The learned sergeant then pro-
ceeded to call the attention of the jury to the evi-
dence that had been given and to the admissions
made by Mrs. Porter as to the manner in which
she had received Major Ross, and to the nature
of the communications that took place between
them, and argued that they were convincing proofs
of the guilt of the parties. Major Ross might have
acted from a feeling of sympathy for the lady, but
husbands did not want young men to sympathise
with their wives, and the nature of the connexion
that existed between the wife of the defendant and
Major Ross was quite sufficient to justify Mr. Porter
in believing that his wife had dishonoured him, and
in refusing to live with her any longer. The learned
sergeant then proceeded to state the facts he pro.
posed to lay before the jury in support of the de-
fendant's case, and referred to the letter that had
been mentioned, and said that immediately he ob-
tained possession of it he felt that he had been dis-
honoured, and when the jury had heard that letter
read they would form their own opinion whether he
was not justified in coming to that conclusion. U..
then read the following letter from Major Ross to
the defendant's wife :

"My own beautiful angel,—l am almost mad
since seeing you yesterday. How different the meet-
ing was to what I had been anticipating our first
meeting would be ! Instead of holding you in my
arms, and forgetting our long separation in loving
embraces, we met only as strangers, scarce daring
to exchange a look. Oh, my darling, darling love,
my heart is so full. I feel as though it would
burst. I would sell my soul to possess you. For
God's sake, my darling, meet me soon. _ I feel des-
perate. You cannot imagine how I worship you.
I love you to distraction ; pity me, my pet. I am
sure you would if you only knew how I am suffer-
ing. If it is possible for the heart to bleed, mine
does. Of course it was very great happiness to see
you and hear your dear musical voice; but then to
be scarce able to whisper one word of love to you—
to be afraid of looking into your beautiful eyes for
fear of betraying my feelings—l would have given
worlds to be allowed even to kiss your tiny feet ;
but no, that brute stood there and prevented all.
I could have killed him. I went home by the
next train, and, to be left to my own
thoughts without interruption, feigned sleepi-
ness, and got to bed before ten, where I lay
thinking of you, my beautiful pet, for hours. I
heard it strike three before I slept, and awoke at
five this morning with the most wretched feelings
imaginable. When—when am I to meet you, dar-
ling ? Oh, what bliss to anticipate. Cannot you
manage to see me this week ? if only for a few
minutes. It will make me so supremely happy. I
want to make you tell me with your own dear
tongue you love me still. I might be in the neigh-
bourhood with a cab, and you could come to me.
Come, my own darling, it will save me from being
ill. I am in a high fever now. You cannot imagine
the dreadful feeling that is in me. Pray write,
dearest, by return, telling me how you are, and if
you accept the proposal contained in yesterday's
letter. I am very anxious to see the roses back in
your beautiful darling face. Now, dearest, I hope
and trust you will not think of sparing my pocket.
I assure you I can spare the money, and if you
don't accept it one way you shall another,
as I shall make you a present with the
cash if you don't use it. Believe me, pet, lam not
a bankrupt, and see no probability of becoming
one. The worst of letter-writing, dearest, is that
one cannot convey one half they feel. I know that
my letters do not explain anything like the deep
and burning love I feel for you. I often wish that
you could read my heart, and then, indeed, you
would understand it, and know what I am suffering
in being parted from you. Dear, darling, beauti-
ful angel, I send you millions of kisses, and remain
your most devoted lover, dying to see you,
" WILLY."
The learned sergeant then proceeded to comment
upon the contents of the letter, arguing that it was
conclusive of the guilt of the parties, and the fol-
lowing witnesses were then examined for the de-
fendant :
Mr. Porter said—l am the defendant in this
action. I was married to Miss Mace in April, 1855.
I took her to Paris, blft I swear I never suggested
what she has stated while we were staying there.
In April last my wife left my house, and I, did
not find her until I saw her at the Princess's
Theatre on the 10th of May, and followed her to
her step-father's house, when I said that I was her
husband, and took her away with me. My wife said
that she was hungry, and I took her to Simpson s,
in the Strand, where we had supper, and I then
took her home to my own house, where she remained
all night. The next morning she refused to stay
any longer, and said she would go to her friends the
Cliftons. 'We had three children, all girls, and aged
respectively six, five, and two years. I took any
wife to Mrs. Clifton's, and she stayed there nearly
a month, and I did not ascertain for several days
where she had gone to, when I found her at the
Crown Hotel, at Bayswater, and I left a notice that
I would not be responsible for any debts she might
incur there. I met my wife several times after this
through appointments made with Mrs. Clifton, but
she persistently refused to tell me where she was
staying. Major Ross was a major in the same
regiment of volunteers as I was. I was
captain in the regiment, and I knew he was a
married man, and thought that he was my friend.
While my wife was away, and I did not know
where she was, Major Ross saw me every day,
and witnessed my anxiety and misery, and said
that if he knew where my wife was he should be
happy to serve me. At one meeting I had with my
wife she told me where she was living at Kensing-
ton, and I went there and took up my residence
with her. The house was kept by persons of the
name of Tonks. I saw Major Ross repeatedly while
I was living with my wife at Kensington, but he
never came to the house with my knowledge. We
used to meet at the training ground. In 1857 I
had had disputes with my wife, but I never
charged her with adultery. I did charge her
with gross impropriety of manner with a certain
gentleman, but I had no idea that my wife was
carrying on a correspondence with Major Ross.
On the 27th of August my wife was anxious to
take a drive, and I hired a phaeton and drove
her to Willesden, where the practice butts
of the regiment were. I had heard that Major
Ross was going to Willesden on this day, and I
met him at the station, :and drove him on the
ground. When I got there we all went into a
tent. I urged the major to attend to his military
duties, but he did not do so, and preferred remain-
ing in the tent, and he asked my wife to take her
bonnet off, which I considered a liberty, and a cer-
tain look of intelligence passed between them,
which made me feel very uncomfortable. After
this I drove my wife and child to Hampstead,
where we had tea, and as we were going home my
wife asked ine not to invite the major to our resi-
dence. She was also lavish of caresses to me,
and called me "her own dear Tom," several times.
About this time I had advertised for a country
house, but received very few answers, and in con-
sequence of something 1 heard my suspicions were
created. My child said, " Mamma has letters every
day, papa," and this was what excited my suspi-
cion, and I spoke to Miss Tonks upon the subject,
and in consequence of what I learned from her I
returned home sooner than I had intended or was
expected by my wife. She was up stairs, and I
was lying on the sofa down stairs, and my wife
came in and appeared surprised at seeing me, and
said, "Do not blame me if you do not get the
house." I had been going to look at a house at
Enfield on that day. My wife seemed uneasy,
and (lid not eat any dinner, but she drank two
glasses of brandy and water. As the hour for
the pest arrived she went to the window, and
\
looked en t, and when the postman's knock came
the left the room, -saying she would go and lie
d'wn- I_replied, "Nu, madam, I will have that
letter,"
snatched I went to the door, and Miss Tonks was
passing with a l
letter that hasr
it f letter and I followed her and
was addressed her. I found it was the
Zen read. The outside envelope
inside was
struggled witlio Miss
I
very nearly succeeded i -
rod the letter, I made an
;lot repeat, and my wife said,
addressedt Tonks, and the letter
to my wife. She
0 get the letter, and
exclamation
so. Havin
itt.tykation which I will
14m ruined." I read