The Sun.
London, England, 1862-03-14 00:00:00

LA iv 1N TELLIGBNCE.—March 13.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)
BURROUGHS V. BURROUGHS AND SILCOCK.
Sir F. Slade resumed and concluded his speech
on behalf of the petitioner in reply upon the whole
case. Having dwelt on the unsatiefaetory character
of the Old Bail:4 alibi which. had been attempted
to be set bp by the respondents, he indignantly de-
notneed the conduct of Mr. Silcock in making so
shameful a charge against a respectable young lady
like Miss West, for the mere purpose of saving his
pocket and evading the duty which rested upon
I.im of marrying the woman he had seduced. The
evidence of Jane Gibbons was not only hideously
impossible, but the wretched girl in the affidavit
she had previously made in the case had not said
one word respecting the extraordinary details which
she had given in the witness-box. As to the story
of Mrs. Blackburn, it was not only absurd on the
face of it, but it proceeded from a woman who was
living in adultery, and who admitted that she had
sworn a false affidavit. The third charge was like-
wise so contradictory to be unworthy of a moment's
consideration in the teeth of the young woman
Helen Reed's oath. No one that had heard the
whole case could hesitate to say that the defence
had been a most wicked one, and the learned coun-
sel called on the jury, by their verdict, to mark
their sense of Mr. Silcock's conduct.
Sir C. Cresswell observed that a vast amount of
evidence had been given on one side and on the
other. It had been to a great extent very contra-
dictory, and he feared that there had been some-
where an attempt to pervert the course of justice.
The case was one of the very greatest importance,
for it deeply affected not only the interests of
the parties before the court, but the well-being
of married life itself; and if juries were not suffi-
ciently men of the world, or sufficiently acute to dis-
cover the truth, the court, instead of being a public
advantage, would soon become one of the greatest
nuisances that had been inflicted upon the country.
The learned judge then proceeded to dismiss at very
great length the evidence which had been given in
the cause. With regard to that of the Rev. Joseph
Neville White, the vicar of Stalham, he observed
that the Jury had been requested as a matter of
common charity to believe that gentleman's acts
rather than his words. No doubt a stern moralist
might think it was the duty of a village pastor, on
discovering a parishioner in the commission of adul-
tery, to proclaim her guilt. Some persons, how-
ever, might take a different view ; but it was for the
jury to say whether they thought the rev. gentle-
man's conduct in holding his tongue had been so
heinous that they would prefer to think he had vio-
lated his oath. Let them remember the position in
which the rev. gentleman was placed. He might
have been cross-examined as to his motives ; but the
counsel for the defence had not thought proper to
subject him to that process. Perhaps the rev, gen-
tleman might have remembered that to take upon
him to denounce this lady would be to assume a great
burden ; for there were three persons by whom he
might have been contradicted, namely, the respon-
dents and Helen Kent. The Silcocks were moreover
persons of some little importance in the village, and
to have revealed what he had seen might have made
a very unpleasant division in that little community.
It was for the jury to say whether there was anything
in these considerations to reduce the rev. gentleman's
conduct to a lower degree of guilt than perjury.
Again, it was said to have been another delinquency
on his part to let his wife remain on familiar terms
with an adulteress. Possibly, however, he might have
had such confidence in his wife as not to think her
likely to be contaminated by any contact she might
have with Mrs. Burroughs, however guilty that lady
In ight have been. As for anysense ofdegradation Mrs.
White could not have felt that unless she had known
Mrs, Burroughs's real character. Many a virtuous
person in this great metropolis might occasionally
find herself in the same drawing-room with some
other person that had violated the laws of chastity,
but she did not feel degraded by the association
unless she knew of that other person's guilt. A
third delinquency on the part of the reverend gen-
tleman was that he had allowed Mrs. Burroughs to
continue to be a district visitor in the parish. The
Court had received no precise information as to the
functions of a district visitor. If they extended to
the offering of spiritual advice and counsel he (the
learned judge) should say that the reverend gentle-
man had done very wrong ; but if district visitors
merely assisted him in inquiring into the personal
necessities and distress of hie poor parishioners, the
reverend gentleman's conduct might wear a different
aspect. On the other hand, it was for the jury to
say whether the behaviour of the witness had been
such that they would be bound, as a matter of
charity, to think that he had been guilty of wilful
perjury. With regard to the alibi, his lordship
pointed out the uncertainty and the contradiction
of the witnesses with regard to time ; and reminded
the jury that they would have to set the evidence
of those witnesses against the positive oath of Mr.
Whit©. The learned judge next pointed out the
gross inconsistencies, contradictions, and improba-
bilities in the evidence of Jane Gibbons, and the'
absence of anything like a real confirmation from
independent witnesses of her story. As for Mrs.
Blackburn, it was for the jury to say whether they
it likely that a man could commit some-
thing very like a rape whilst he was holding a
horse. If there was the smallest reliance to be
placed in the evidence of this woman—and it
seemed that she was living the life of a common pro-
stitute—she had made a false affidavit, through the
instrumentality of Mr. Silcock, in order to induce the
Court to allow this charge to be placed on the record.
Sir C. Cresswell also complained of the conduct of
Mr. Silcock with regard to the manner in which
the charge against Helen Reed had been admitted
upon the files of the court, and he commented upon
the evidence by which that allegation was sought to
be proved. The jury had had Miss West before
them. It was clear that there had been more visit-
ing at Mr. West's house on the part of Mr. Bur-
roughs than was perhaps prudent, and there had
been some familiarities, kissing and the like, which
had been better left alone ; the jury bad heard the
denial of the young lady herself and the testimony
of her family. The learned judge concluded by
putting the questions raised by the pleadings to
the jury for their answer.
After deliberating for two hours and three-quar•
ters the jury found that none of the charges of adul-
tery had been proved, thus acquitting both the peti-
tioner and the respondents.
GRAY V, GRAY AND THE QUEEN'S PROCTOR
(INTERVENING).
Sir F. Slade, Q.C., and Dr. Spinks appeared for
the Queen's Proctor; Mr. M. Chambers, Q.C., and
.1)r. Warnbey for the petitioners.
On the 17th of January, 1861, Mrs. Mary Louisa
Gray had obtained a decree nisi for a dissolution
of her marriage with Richard Thomas Clement
Gray, on the ground of bigamy. In March follow-
ing the Queen's Proctor appeared and alleged
collusion, and also that Mrs. Gray was herself liv-
ing in adultery with a person named Kendal. In
her answer she admitted the adultery, but denied
the collusion.
The case on behalf of the Crown was this. In
JB5O, Gray, who had been a commission agent and
a provision merchant, sued Kendal, an omnibus
proprietor, in an action for trim. con., but the
cause was settled, and did not come on for trial.
In 1852 Gray, representing himself to be a single
man, married a Miss Adams, with whom he lived
in Prescott-street, at Wapping, and at Moulsey.
In 1853 Mrs. Gray called on Miss Adams and ac-
quainted her with the fact that she was herself the
wife of her supposed husband, and that she was
the mother of three children by him. After this
Gray was arrested on a charge of bigamy laid
against him by an uncle of Miss Adams, but as
that lady did not choose to leave the prisoner, the
prosecution was dropped. It was then taken up
by the Crown, and Gray, convicted at the Old
Bailey, received a month's imprisonment. He
returned to Miss Adams, but that lady stated
that she had not lived with him for the laSt
three years. Ultimately Mrs. Gray, though still
living with Kendal, brought her suit against her
husband in the present Court. He did not appear,
and a decree nisi was obtained in due course.
Miss Adams having been examined,
Sir F. Slade proposed to interrogate Mrs. Gray
herself, but
Mr. Chambers objected, alleging that she was
not a competent or compellable witness on such an
issue.
Sir C. Cresswell held that objection to be good,
and directed the jury that there was no evidence
on the it collusion.
y
ho
;round of
Sir e having found accordingly,
t
tyremrr ;ell dismissed the petition
ae to costs. ray's adultery, but made no order

BENSON'S WA,Ten,ii ~-- - -
Gold watches, 6 to ICOguineas;
-11111 JO and
niechanism."—Morning 1.0441:1) CLocKs.--" Perfection of
o.l'haTeli beSt adapted to
silver watches, 2 to f',o g,*
Pamphlet, free for two stamps de 8 I:arnei nr.tb
lovne ' . so
adf ne,,,,evttwe;
every
c Illustratedonstruo
of the world to
tion of watch, enables persons in
select with the greatest certainty th
their use. Watches sent free and safe,
a remittance.—.l. W. Benson, 33 and 34, I receipt of
47, Cornhill, London, E.C.—Established 1743.