The Sun.
London, England, 1836-07-28 00:00:00

CONSISTORY COURT.

GROVER V. GROVER.
This is a suit for separation by reason of adultery, pro-
moted by Mr. John Grover against his wife, Louisa
Grover. The parties were married on the Ist of August,
1830, and proceeded in the course of June, 1834, to
Ville Dieu, in France, where an adulterous intercourse
was pleaded to have taken place between Mrs. Grover
and M. Amadee de Wall, rector of the post in that
town, and a captain 'in the National Guard. The main
facts which were alleged as leading up to the commission
of adultery were that Mrs. Grover and Mr. Wall were in
the habit of walking together, unattended, at an early
hour in the morning in lonely lanes and fields near the
town of Ville Dieu ; that on one occasion they had re-
mained together in the park belonging to the King of the
French after the gates were closed ; and that subsequent
to the return of Mr. and Mrs. Grover to London, a clan-
destine correspondence had been carried on between Mr.
Wall and the defendant.

Dr. LUSIIINGTON could not pronounce for the separa-
tion as prayed for by the husband upon all the evidence
now before him. It was therefore his duty to pronounce
against the prayer of the husband.

BANKRUPTCY COURT.

GEORGE LEVI'S BANKRUPTCY.
The bankrupt in this case was a West India merchant,
and a fiat of bankruptcy having been awarded against him,
circumstances transpired during the investigation of his ac-
counts which rendered frequent adjournments of his final
examination necessary. The debts and liabilities of the
bankrupt were about 66,0001., to meet which he had good
debts, cash in hand, and property, amounting only to 945/.,
and the creditors had also the prospect of realising a sum
out of 22,0001. of doubtful debts. The investigations into
the bankrupt's affairs have been most minute and extensive,
the Learned Commissioner having devoted thirty-five
mornings to them, independently of the inquiries of the
official assignee, Mr. Clark, in tracing, if possible, property,
which the bankrupt became possessed of soon before his
bankruptcy to the amount of 25,0001., or 30,0001. These
inquiries in a commercial point of view are of interest, par-
ticularly as regards the administration of bankrupt law.
Mr. Commissioner WILLIAMS said the question involved
in this case was one in which the commercial public were
deeply interested. The claim and liabilities of the bank-
rupt were about 66,0301., to meet which he had only
money, property, &c., to the amount of 945/., and the ex-
pectation of realising a portion of 22,000/. in doubtful
debts. The bankrupt, only three months before the fiat
was issued against him, and when the state of his books
must have been known to him, took up goods from mer-
chants and others amounting to nearly 25,0001. or 30,000/.,
which were chiefly consigned to parties related to him. Of
these amounts 9,462/. were entrusted to John Levi, and
9,000/. to Jacob Levi. A short time before the bank-
ruptcy John Levi, the bankrupt's nephew, was commissioned
to go to the West Indies to collect debts, and take goods
to the amount of 8,0001. or 9,000/. It had been remarked
by the Learned Counsel on the part of the creditors that it
was extraordinary that John Levi should have been selected
for the purpose, and could the Court believe the assertion
of the bankrupt that he would trust him 20,0001., when he
knew that he had failed on the Stock Exchange, had paid
his creditors only a small per tentage, and had, previously to
his going to the West Indies, been a dabbler in the funds,
or what was called an Alley man. Nor could it be be-
lieved that the bankrupt was indebted to John Levi to the
extent of 6,000/., as stated in the accounts. He
(the Learned Commissioner) thought with the Learned
Counsel that those statements were inconsistent. The
Learned Commissioner then referred to the exertion
of the official assignee in this case, and also noticed the
successful efforts made in the case of Duncan Neil Smith,
when out of 15,000/. or 16,000/. of debts, 14,0001. were
expunged as being fraudulent. In justice to the creditors,
and for the protection of the commercial interests, he felt
bound to adjourn the final examination of the bankrupt
sine die

The bankrupt's petition, at the request of his solicitor,
-as renewed for a month.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

lIOME CIRCUIT.—LEWES JuLr 27.
BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE.-HARRISON V. GOULD.
This action was brought
,by the plaintiff, Betty Harrison,
to recover from the defendant; John Gould, compensation
in damages for a breach of promise of marriage.
From the evidence called on the part. of the plaintiff, it
appeared that she, now twenty-four years of age, was kitchen
maid to Lord Egrcmont, in whose service her father was
as gardener. The defendant, who was twenty-two years of
age, lived with his uncle, the late Mr. Tyler, an attorney at
Petworth and was articled to him. Living in the same
village, the plaintiff and defendant constantly saw one
another, and the latter declared himself much attached to
her, made an offer of marriage, and was received. They
were in the habit of being much together, and attending a
Methodist chapel at Petworth, each professing to be very
pious. The marriage day was at last fixed and the bridal
attire purchased ; but the defendant thought it right, ulti-
mately, to go from, his promises and break off the match.
The defendant had professed to different persons great love
for the plaintiff, and stated his intention to marry her. Mr.
Tyler, in his will, left him 4,000/. to he paid when he was
23 years of age, besides leaving to his mother 60,000/. at
her disposal, upon her decease to her children, of which she
had six, if she thought proper.
On the part of the defendant several witnesses were
called to prove that the plaintiff had been guilty of great
levity of condnet ; and by their testimony it appeared that
she had gone to help in the bar at the Anchor, at Hor-
sham, and while there had allowed Mr. Newman, the land-
lord, to kiss her, and take other liberties, and had also
spent 15s. in beer among some dragoons quartered at
Horsham, and done other improper things.
A number of letters from the defendant to the plaintiff
were put in evidence, and caused much laughter in Court,
from the ridiculous style in which they were written, being
filled with quotations from the. Scriptures, and vows of love
and sorrow for his sinfulness. In one dated August 31,
1833, he indorsed a memorandum drawn up as follows :
" In the name, and with the assistance of the'Almighty and
the Lord Jesus Christ, who came down to save sinners, &c.
I will marry no one but you. Signed--JOHANNES AURUM"
(Anglice, gold, in allusion to his name).
The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages,
150/.

OXFORD CIRCUIT.---ST.IFFOR.D, JuLr 26.
" THE TWA DOGS.".-EAVIDSON V. NICHOLLS.
This was an action to recover 101., lodged with the de-
fendant, a stakeholder in a match between two greyhounds
—Yorick, the property of Mr. Shelly, and the plaintiff's
dog—Topper. The race took place on the 23d of Fe-
bruary, in a field belonging to Lord Talbot, near Stafford,
on the terms of the best of three heats. •It was admitted
that Yorick won the first, but in the second and third