The Sun.
London, England, 1862-11-08 00:00:00

SCENE A 7 A BULL FIGHT.

The circus at Saragossa has just been the scene of a san"
guinary drama. On Sunday the place was full, and two
toreadors of secondary rank, but very popular as native
the city, named Joaquin Gil and Perez, made the sof
custom-
ary salute and offered to kill the bulls in honour of the pre-
sident and the assembly. The first animal was cleverly
killed by Perez ; the second was a Portuguese animal,
very vicious, cunning, and strong. He received the fatal
blow from Gil, but at the same moment he tossed the
unhappy man into the air, received him upon his horns,
which entered deep into the body, and throw him to the
ground senseless, and then fell dead by the side of his vic-
tim. The third bull was also a Portuguese. The torea-
dors were under a state of terror difficult to describe. The
pioadors would scarcely touch him. Fierce in the middle
of the arena, he seemed to defy the banderilleros, who at
great risk fixed two or three firebrands to his neck, in order
to excite him. From pain and noise the bull became furi-
ous. The task of killing him fell to Perez, who advanced
with hesitation, and seemed only able to strike feebly
with his sword. The President called to him, and pressed
to have the bull's legs cut with the demi-lune (an immense
scythe fixed on a pole), but Perez refussd this proposition,
which is considered to involve disgrace to a toredor. He
returned to the fight. The bull threw itself upon him
i ; in
vain he cast at it the muletta in red cloth ; the bull paid no
attentiou to it and followed him. But he seized the barriers,
j and in leaping over threw his sword at the bull's front. It
struck the beast in the face, and by a strange fatality re-
bounded and penetrated the thigh of the poor toreador,
cutting it to the bone. The blood run in torrents from an
open artery. The man was carried away, and the demi-
lune was then employed. Two hind legs of the beast were
cut ; but even then upon its stumps it appeared so terrible
that no one dm ed approach it. The demi-lune was again
brought, and one of the front legs cut off.
The
himbeast
fell
to the ground and a stroke from the dagger finished
Will it be believed that even after this the public were not
satisfied, and demanded the rest of the sport, and that the
authorities were obliged to give them. tickets for the next
exhibition? The toreador Gil was buried on Tuesday;
the
other man is in a dangerous state, amputationandi is to be
b
tried when he seems strong enough to
ear 1.

- IMPORTANT CASE.— \
interest that are
THE DIVORCE
CC:oil:TUC—an usual
of cc4:swell Cresswell," says the Belfast
Among the cases
about to occupy Sir
ono that will be eagerly watched in the
News Letter, The petitioner is the son of a nobleman
north of Irelax;
important
I las
tpeur
,bci:iiegisnne
d. officewh oi 8
the connexionheir presumptivewith a v ery
to
an
an.
who holds
This gentleman was a short time ago
town in
in which one of her Majesty's con-
dent Irish Peer.
corespondent in a case
abroad presented a petition for the dissolution of his
con-
suls
on the ground of his wife's adultery. The mar-
niarria_gaes in process of time dissolved, and within a few
riage ^
weeks after the judgment of Sir Cresswell Cresswell had
been delivered the respondent and the co-respondent were
married on the Continent, where the latter had been sojourn-
ing for some time. It seems, however, that the lady who
thus became twice a wife with-Jut having passed through
the usual ordeal of widowhood has proved unfaithful to her
second vows. The petitioner alleges that she has com-
mitted adultery at Leamington and at Bath, and he prays
that the Court will annul his marriage on the ground that
it was contracted before the three months then allowed by
law for an appeal, or that failing on that point, the mar-
riage may be dissolved on the ground of adultery. The case
presents some curious features of interest for the public
generally, and especially for the jurist, as it is the first in-
stance since the establishment of the Court of Divorce its
which a respondent and a co-respondent to a petition for
dissolution of marriage, having repaired their error as far
as they could by marrying each other, have again appealed
to the Court to separate them on the ground of infidelity
during such married state. It also raises the question as
to whether a marriage contracted before the expiration of
the time DaQaths allowed for appeal is valid,"