The Sun.
London, England, 1862-05-21 00:00:00

MANCHESTERLSHEFFIELD, AND LIN-

COLNSHIRE.
The total expenses of this company's railways,
including rents, tolls, duty, &c., from January 1 to
May 11, 1362, amounted to £lll,lBO, as against
£121,450 for the corresponding period of 1861.
The total receipts including rents, &c., of this com-
pany's canals from January 1 to April 30 amounted
to £22,314, as against £22,922 for the correspond-
ing period of 1861 ; and the expenses to £16,291,
as against £18,126, leaving a balance of net profit
of £6,023, as against £4,796 for the corresponding
period of 1861.

the Incumbered Estates Court held that the release
was valid as regarded the claim of the London and
County Bank, which decision was affirmed by the
Lords Justices of the Court of Appeal in Ireland.
Hence the present appeal.
Their lordships now delivered their opinions, and
held that the decision of the court below was errone-
ous, must be reversed, and the appeal allowed.
MUNBEE'S DIVORCE.

As this house still retains its jurisdiction in cases
of divorce between subjects of her Majesty resident
in India, the following case came before their lord-
ships this day. The petitioner, Gore Boland MUM-
bee, is a Lieut.-Colonel of Engineers in that part of
her Majesty's Indian army attached to the presi-
dency of Bombay. On the 28th of September, 1846,
the petitioner, bung then 31 years of age, was
married to Sophia Catherine Frankland, spinster,
aged 23, at the church of Sattara, in the presidency
of Bombay, according to the rites and ceremonies of
the Church of England. The parties lived and
cohabited together as man and wife at Poona and
Mahableshewar from the date of their marriage till
April, 1851, when they left India, and came together
to England. Colonel Muutee returned to India at
the end of 1852, leaving his wife behind on account
of ill health, but she rejoined him at Bombay, in the
spring of 1854. In 1857 she again came to England
from ill b e:lth, her husband's military duties detain-
ing him in India, and she returned in March, 1859,
and then cohabitation continued till January, 1860,
when Colonel Munbee was obliged to go on a tour
of military inspection which involved a separation
of a few months from his wife, whom he left with
her sister, the wife of a brother officer, at Poona,
subsequently at Mahableshewar. A legacy having
been left to Mrs. Munbee, she entered into a corre-
spondence with her husband, and induced him to
settle money upon her to her separate use. On
19th May, 1860, Mrs. Munbee left Mahablesbe-
war, and proceeded under an assumed name by
way of Bombay to Surat, where she was joined
by Charles Payne Barras, a lieutenant in the
29th Native Infantry, with whom she eloped for
Dohua on the 22d of May, 1860; since which time
she has been living in open adultery with him. On
the 26th May, 1860, Mrs. Munbee addressed the
following letter h., her husband:—

" Nay 26, 1860.
" I have at last taken a step which will enable you to re-
lease yourself and me from a tie which has become each
year more irksome to both. I cannot hope that at first even
the recollection of the miserable terms on which we have
long lived will reconcile you to my having sought the pro-
tection of Captain Barras; but if you take the only proper
course open to you Under the circumstances, you will in the
end congratulate yourself on my having done so. What I
have now done is done after long and mature consideration,
and I have well weighed all the disadvantages attending
such a step, and prefer setting every consideration at de-
fiance to continuing to lead a hopless, aimless, and miser-
able life. Circumstances so far favour you that the usual
talk and scandal attending such a case may be entirely
avoided. I have made no confidante, and am going to such
an isolated place th.st if you choose to apply immediately for
a divorce nothing wed be known until you are thereby rid
of me. You may choose not to afford me the release which I
desire. If so, you will regret it hereafter, and the disgrace
of my position will be reflected upon you. Nor can you
satisfy yourself by a hostile meeting with Captain Barras;
for my sake he cannot and will not give you such satisfac-
tion; duelling too is out of fashion, and redress by law
within your reach. If you seek ' damages'. only you will
oblige me to bring forward evidence of a disagreeable na-
ture, to prove that no happy home has been destroyed, and
you must fail in gaining them ; therefore for your own
sake, if not for mine, refrain from such a course."
An action for criminal conversation was brought by
Colonel Munbee in the Supreme Court at Bombay
against Lieut. Barras, in which judgment went by
default, and 3,000 rupees damages awarded, which,
with the costs, were duly paid. A seperation a
mensa et thoro was also obtained in the ecclesiasti-
cal side of the Supreme Court ; and the present bill
was introduced -for the purpose of dissolving the
marriage.
Mr. Lush, with whom was Mr. Macqueen, ap-
peared for the petitioner, and stated the case.
The printed evidence as to criminal intercourse
and subsequent elopement and cohabitation, which
was taken and verified in India, was put in; and
witnesses having been examined to give additional
proof of the marriage,
The bill was read a second time.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
Sittings in Nisi Prias.
(Before Mr. Justice Wightman end a Common Jury.)
RATHERA V. CLARK.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff, a
jockey, against the defendant, a gentleman well-
known on the turf, to recover the sum of £B3 19s.
for services rendered as a jockey. The defendant
pleaded, first, never indebted ; and, secondly, pay-
ment.
Mr. Murphy was counsel for the plaintiff; and
Mr. Hawkins, Q.C., and Mr. Best for defendant.
Mr. Murphy, having opened the plaintiff's case,
called the following witnesses :
The plaintiff said—T am a jockey, and have had
great experience in horses. In the Liverpool Spring
races of 1856 I met the defendant upon the race
course. Priest, who was one of the defendant's
jockeys, introduced me to him. The defendant asked
me what weight I rode. I told him, and we then
agreed that I should go into his service as a jockey,
at a salary of £4O per annum. I was never to ride
any other gentleman's horse in the same race. 1
was to have 5 guineas for a winning mount, and 3
guineas for a losing one. I had leave to ride other
gentlemen's horses for other races. I was in the
defendant's service until the middle of the year
1857, when I was turned off by the defendant,
with several other jockeys. During the time that
I was in defendant's employ I rode Lady
Florence at Ascot, but did not win. At the same
meeting I rode South Western, and won the £5O
stakes. I rode Lady Florence again at the same
meeting, but did not win. I rode Weathercock at
Hampton-court, Yorkshireman at Goodwood, York-
shireman at Doncaster, Eagle at Manchester, and
Yorkshireman again at Lichfield. I did not win
on either of those occasions. The defendant never
paid me a shilling for my services. Since I left the
defendant's employ I have been living with Colonel
Cockburn (Lord Seaton's son) and Lord Stamford.:
Cross-examined—At the time I made the agree-
ment with the defendant I was about eighteen years
old. I was not engaged as a stable boy. Mr. Bur-
bridge was the trainer at the defendant's establish-
ment at Edgeford. He did not pay me five guineas
for my services. I did not engage at a salary of sa.
per week. I lived at Edgeford, and my board and
lodging was found me. I used sometimes to take
the horses out for exercise.
Priest was called, and corroborated the plaintiff
as to the defendant having engaged the latter in his
(the witness's) place as a jockey. Witness was
obliged t© summon the defendant in the Brompton
County Court before he would pay him his salary.
The defendant after wards took out a summons
against witness for perjury, but had abandoned it.
Cross. examined—He did not know that the
reason why defendant did not appear to answer the
summons in the county court was in consequence of
the funeral of his mother taking place on the same
day. He was discharged in consequence of being
too heavy to ride. He was paid £2O per annum,
and five guineas for winning mounts aid three
guineas for losing ones.
Re-examined—The plaintiff's services were more
valuable than his were, because the plaintiff was
much lighter.
This was the plaintiff's case.
For the defence Edward Rawson Clark was
called, and said—l am the defendant. I reside in
Thistle-grove, Brompton, I have a racing esta-
blishment at Edgeford, iu Staffordshire. The plain-
tiff was engaged by me as a stable boy at ss. a week.
I was at the Liverpool Spring Races in 1856. Priest
never introduced me to the plaintiff. I did not ask
the plaintiff what his weight was. I never spoke
to him at Liverpool in my life. I did not engage
him as a jockey. I gave him five guineas on one
occasion. That was for winning the race at Lich-
field with South-Western. It is customary in esta-
blishments like mine to engage boys as stable boys.
If they turn cut well we put them upon a horse for
the purpose of giving them an insight to the busi-
ness. The plaintiff left my service in the middle
of 1857. He lever applied to me for any money
when he left me, and I never heard anything of
this claim 'anti: the beginning of this year. I was
summoned by Priest at the Brompton County
Court. I could not appear to the summons on ac-
count of my mother's funeral. I subsequently took
out a summons against him for perjury. I did not
appear to it tArough a mistake on the part of my
attorney, and (onsequently that was dismissed.
In cross-examination the defendant again denied
that he bad teen the plaintiff at the Liverpool
Spring Meeting, and also that he had engaged him
as a jockey. lie was only engaged as a stable boy.
He fed with the other stable boys, and was paid ss.
a week by the defendant's trainer.
Burbridge
, the defendant's trainer, was then
called, and said—l went with the defendant in 1856,
and continued with him until July or August, 1857.
'There were abut eight or nine stable boys at the
time at the establishment at Edgeford, and the
plaintiff was ole of them. I paid him his wages.
I never heard that he was engaged at £49 per an-
num. I gava lim £5 for winning the race at Lich-
field with South Western. A stable boy is bound
to ride when lia master puts him up.
The learnedcounsel having addressed the jury on
behalf of theirrespective clients,
The learnedjudge summed up, and the jury re-
turned a verrLet for the plaintiff for the amount
clai