The Sun.
London, England, 1865-01-14 00:00:00

CAMILLE V. DONATO,

The, attention of his Lordship was again called this
morning to the contention between Mr. Morton, of the
Canterbury and Oxford Music Halls, and the Royal English
Opera, for the services of the celebrated one-legged dancer,
Donato. The point decided this morning was merely one
of form and practice. The question, in the first
instance, arose with respect to the decision of Vice-
Chancellor Wood, from whose decision an appeal was
made to the Lord Chancellor. His Lordship decided that
the English Opera Company (Limited) were necessarily
parties to the suit, and that the costs of the application as
to that part of the case were to be paid by the plaintiff.
Upon the question of appeal, a great deal of evidence was
gone into, and it now came before his lordship to decide
whether the costs of that evidence were properly the costs
of the appeal.
The Lord Chancellor decided that they were not costs in
the motion, and therefore not to be included in the costs of
the appeal.

COURT 'OF DIVORCE.
(Before the Lord Ordinary and a Special Jury.)
CHETWYND V. CHETWYND.

This morning the Court proceeded with the rebutting
testimony on behalf of the petitioner.
Evidence was given by the manager of the Queen's Hotel,
Birmingham, to show that Mr. Nicholls slept alone in their
room No. 29, on the night of the 23d of December last ;
but the witness could not identify Mr. Nicholls as the gen-
tleman.

Other evidence was given by the landlady and servants
of the Temperance Hotel, 49 and 50, Paradise-street, Bir-
mingham, to show that Mrs. Chetwynd slept alone in their
room, No. 5, on the night of the 23d of December. Mrs.
Chetwynd was identified by the witnesses as the lady. She
was like a former servant at the hotel, and this was re-
marked at the time by the witnesses, and an old gentleman,
a regular customer, whom one of the witnesses thought she
could identify also, only he was dead.
Mary Elchorne, examined by Sergeant Ballantine, said
—On the 10th of August, 1863, she went into Mrs. Chet-
wynd's service, and remanded till February, 1864. She was
housemaid. She first saw Mr. Nicholls when the Misses
Mott was at Longdon Hall. They lunched there with some
other persons. Mr. Nicholls called for a stick he had left
in the phaeton, but Mr. Chetwynd said he should keep it,
and he did not get it. Mrs. Chetwynd was dressing for
dinner when Mr. Nicholls called for his stick, and spoke to
him for about two minutes in the library. She accompanied
Mrs. Chetwynd to Stafford on the night of the ball. Mrs.
Chetwynd was to have slept at Col. Hogg's that night, and
her luggage was taken there, but she slept at Miss Edward's,
and witness slept with her. Mr. Nicholls came home and sat
up after they had gone to bed. Mr. Chetwynd got up between
eight and nine o'clock, and had breakfast. They had done
breakfast before Mr. Nicholls came down. (The witness
gave the same account of the "meet," and Mr. Nicholls'
portmanteau which was given by previous witnesses.)
When Mrs. Chetwynd went to Birmingham she wore a
black hat with a pheasant's feather. She had a fall which
made it look like a bonnet. She wore a violet dress.

Cross-examined by Mr. Kennealy—lt was in the begin-
ning of December that Mr. Nicholls first came to lunch at
Longdon Hall. The Stafford ball was on the 18th of De-
cember. He left about four o'clock. She did not know that
Mr. Chetwynd refused to admit Mr. Nicholls to his house
Mr. Nicholls brought Mrs. Chetwynd home from the
Stafford ball, and had tea with Mrs. Chetwynd. A bed
was not prepared for Mr. Nicholls at Longdon Hall on the
night of the ball.

Harriet Anne Edwards, of 3, Market-square, Stafford,
said she kept a fancy repository, and let apartments. Dur-
ing the last 20 years gentlemen of the Bar had taken her
lodgings during the sessions and assizes ; amongst others,
Justice Pigott, Justice Keating, Sir W. Alexander, Mr.
Huddlestone, and Mr. Powell. She knew Mrs. Chetwynd
before her marriage ; she had only known Mr. Matthews
since 1861. He was lodging with her during the summer
assizes of 1862. Mr. and Mrs. Chetwynd called upon him.
Mrs. Chetwynd asked her to go to New Brighton, but she did
not know whether it was at that time. She did not think Mr.
Chetwynd was present when Mrs. Chetwynd spoke about
New Brighton. She followed Mrs. Chetwynd there in
August 1862, and remained there until Mrs. Chetwynd
left, and was constantly with her. She knew all the per-
sons who came to the house. Mr. Matthews called the day
after witness arrived there. He lodged at an hotel on the
sands. Ho paid one or two visits, and witness was in their
company. Sho never knew Mrs. Chetwynd go out alone
with Mr. Matthews. Once Mr. Matthews and Mrs. Chet-
wynd went to a Roman Catholic Church together at Liver-
pool. Witness was asked to accompany them, but she was
unwell. She remembered the Stafford ball in 1863. She
had not known Mr. Nicholls before that. -He came

that night and engaged a bed at her house. Mrs.
Chetwynd and her maid arrived at half-past ten. (The
witness described the events of the evening as Mary
Elchorne did.) Mrs. Chetwynd was not alone with Mr.
Nicholls one minute during the time they were in her
house. Mr. Matthews and Mrs. Chetwynd had been occa-
sionally alone together in the sitting-room of her house.
It was not true that Mr. Matthews and Mrs. Chetwynd sat
up late together, and that Mrs. Chetwynd was IN out by
the servant. Witness always sat up. She had never seen
any impropriety or undue familiarity between Mr.
Matthews and Mrs. Chetwynd.
Cross-examined by Mr. Kennealy—lt was quite by acci-
dent that she went to New Brighton on the day when
Mr. Chetwynd left. They met Mr. Matthews on the sands.
Mrs. Chetwynd had beautifully waving hair, and she had
never seen Mr. Matthews put his fingers through her
hair when she came from bathing. When Mr. Matthews
and Mrs. Chetwynd went to Liverpool to church,
she could not swear that Mrs. Chetwynd came back to
New Brighton the same evening. Sho did not recollect
letters having passed between Mr. Matthews and Mrs.
Chetwynd. She was not aware that Mrs. Chetwynd carried
a likeness of Mr. Matthews about with her. She did not
remember Mrs. Chetwynd going out in a brougham with
Mr. Matthews. She did not know that Mr. Matthews lent
her books. She did not make any inquiries of Mr. Nicholls
when he applied for the bed. Mr. Chetwynd had spoken
to her about a gentleman coming from Lichfield, and Mr
Nicholls said he came from Lichfield.

Re-examined by Sir R. Phillimore—lf Mrs. Chetwynd
had not come back on the Sunday afternoon, when she
went to church with Mr. Matthews, it would have made an
impression on her mind. She had no doubt Mrs. Chetwynd
did come back in the afternoon. Mr. Chetwynd used to
come to her house frequently, and was on friendly terms
with Mr. Matthews.
Sir R Phillimore said ho had no other witnesses to
examine unless they should be necessary by Mr. Matthews'
evidence. Mr. Matthews was absent on a commission, and
would return to-day or to-morrow, so that he could be
examined on the next sitting of the Court.
After some conversation, in the course of which the

judge said they were trying four causes at least in one, and
remarked that there was no probability of the case closing
in less than two or three days more, the further considera-
tion of the case was adjourned until Wednesday.

. COURT OP BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Registrar Winslow.)
IN RE EURIPIDI.-THE LAW AS TO RELEASE.

The bankrupt was a merchant of France, and to-day
he applied for his release from custody. It was stated
that he had come to this country in the hopo of
arranging his affairs with his creditors. In this he,
to some extent, failed, and he was arrested upon a writ
of capias. An application was made to a judge at Cham-
bers for an order of release, but the judge declined to inter-
fere. The present application was resisted on the ground
that if the bankrupt was released he would in all proba-
bility leave the country. Upon the question also of bail,
the detaining creditor objected strongly, and urged that
bail would not be a sufficient security.
His Honour said that he felt bound to decline to interfere
until assignees should be chosen.
Application refused.

THE CASE OF TIMOTHY DALY.—yesterday Mr.
Farmll, the commissioner appointed by the Poor Law
Board, resumed his inquiry into the circumstances at-
tending the death of Timothy Daly. The investigation
took place in the board room of the Holborn Union
Workhouse. Mr. Shuter, hon. sec. of the Farringdon
Dispensary, was examined at great length, and detailed
his experience of the case and the action which he took
the witness believed, a house-
upon it. Mrs. Fitzgerald, the landlady of No. 2, Union-
Kweoyrs,khinouNsVeooind-costnrefeoti;hiatyd
wreitmhohviesd
ownh
court, where Daly died, described the circumstances of th
lodge in he
removal of deceased from the workhouse to
and durin
told witness that the deceased was not
house. Mrs Daly, who was,
whmuiassi
hbd
.a atn husband
hh fromee Ch raodt shse
Daly was in witness's house Mrs. to want for anything,
she tthoeugnhi:
efordatyhes
for wine and other things Daly paid her 30s.
sick man. Mr. Lowne, the surgeon,e
every day excepting on the s came to see him
every afternoon excepting t Sunday, and Mrs. Daly came
milk, arrowroot, and muttonwo.The deceased had eggs,
him as well port wine, half chops every day, and she gave
tum-
bler ; the wine a-quartem at a time, in a tum-
cost Bd. -
sometimes once and rr quartem ;h© had the wine
and more than half sometimes more frequently every day,
a pint of
beer daily. The inquiry was
adjourned.