The Sun.
London, England, 1870-06-04 00:00:00

LAW AND POLICE.

SPIRITUALISM V. FACT. —ln the Court of Vice-Chancel-
lor Sir R. Malins, to-day, a cause, the details of which.
curiously illustrated the superstition existing in the present
day, was brought forward. A wife applied for the distri-
bution of a fund, the settlement of which upon her
depended upon the death of her husband, who it
transpired, left England 'for San Francisco, some years
since. The applicant had received two letters from some
San Franciscan friends, informing her of the decease
of her husband, but a subsequent communication intimated
that he was still alive, having been constantly seen
for several weeks in succession. The wife, however, per-
sisted in a belief of her husband's death ; she entertained
a fervent admiration for spiritualism, and having invoked
the aid of the medium of communication with the distant
regions, hence the firmness of her conviction. His Honour
did not entirely agree with the conclusiveness of the
applicant's reasoning, and ordered that the distribution of
the fund was to be made subject to the receipt of
positive evidence of the husband's death.

THE CABE OF MRS. LUMLEY.—The long-pending case
of Mrs. Lumley has been brought to a conclusion in
Vice-Chancellor Stuart's Court. The suit, which has ex-
cited much interest, was instituted by Major B. Lumley
to impeach the validity of a settlement executed by him
on Mrs. Eliza Lumley in 1864, whom he then believed to
be his lawful wife. Major Lumley married, in 1847, a
lady who described herself as Eliza Haynes, spinster, but
who it appeared had married a French teacher named
Victor in the island of Jersey some years previously.
Victor deserted her, and she returned to her family and
resumed her maiden name. Mrs. Lumley alleged that the
plaintiff was informed of all these facts before her mar-
riage with him. In 1864 it was agreed they should sepa-
rate, the plaintiff allowing her £3OO a year, the
plaintiff contemplating, it was said, another marriage.
The case has been before the courts several times,
Major Lumley's chief contention is that he was ignorant
of Mrs. Lumley's prior marriage until 1868, when he took
proceedings against her for bigamy. The verdict of the
jury was then against the defendant ; but the conviction
was quashed by the Court of Appeal. The plaintiff now
sought to set aside the settlement of £3OO a year made in
1864. The Vice-Chancellor, without calling on the de-
fendant's counsel, held that the plaintiff's case had failed
entirely. There was no evidence that Mrs. Lumley
knew at the time she was executing the deeds that
she was not the plaintiff's lawful wife. She had passed
as such for seventeen years, and the description in
the deed was accurate. It was evident that the plaintiff
had heard a report of his wife's former marriage before
making the settlement, and the circumstances reflected
great discredit on the plaintiff: He was described in the
bill as a military man, a member of the profession that
takes honour for its rule, and in dealing with him on that
footing he cut a very bad figure. Under all the circum-
stances the whole costs of the suit must be paid by the
plaintiff.

AN INSURANCE POLICY.—An appeal from a decree of
the Master of the Rolls has been heard in the Court of
Chancery. The case referred to a policy of insurance for
£l,OOO in the British Nation Life Assurance Association,
the plaintiff being the person to whom the policy was as-
signed. It appeared that Rigg, the insurer, in filling up
the form of proposal, said he was " temperate generally,"
whereas it turned out after his death that he had suffered
repeatedly from delirium tremens, having been at one
time placed in alunatic asylum in consequence. The Master
of the Rolls, notwithstanding, was of opinion that the
assurance was bond fide effected, and made an order for
the payment of the amount. From this decree the com-
pany appealed, and the Court of Appeal dismissed the
bill with costs, the Lord Chancellor observing that there
could be no doubt if a true Ind fair disclosure of Rigg's
health and habits had been made in answer to the ques-
tions asked it would have materially affected the granting
of the policy.

THE STATUTE OF MORTMAIN.—In the Rolls Court
a case bearing upon the statute of mortmain was
decided. It seemed that a Mrs. Eliza Springett, being
desirous of establishing alms houses in her native place,
Hawkhurst, Kent, devised the residue of a large estate to
a gentlemen named Piper, on the distinct un-
derstanding that her charitable project should
be carried out. The property was devised abso-
lutely, the testatrix having been informed that her desires
could not otherwise be attended to without a violation of
the law. The next of kin, however, now applied to the
court, as a court of• equity, claiming the residue of the
estate, on the ground that the devise in question was an
attempt to defeat the Statute of Mortmain. Lord
Romilly gave an elaborate judgment, and held that the
devise was contrary to the law, and amounted in fact to a
fraud under the statute.

THE SHEDDEN LEGITIMACY CASE.—In the Divorce
Court an application was made by Miss Shedden, in
person, in the appeal against the refusal of the Judge-
Ordinary to grant a new trial in the case of Shedden v.
Shedden and the Attorney-General, wherein the jury
found against Miss Shedden nearly nine years ago. She
applied for a postponement of the hearing of the appeal
until the matters before the House of Lords were finally
disposed of, and there being no opposition on the part of
the defendants, the application was granted. The case
therefore again stands over.

" MAGGIE MAY."—The well-known Christy Minstrels
song of " Maggie May," has formed the subject of an
action in the Bail Court. The plaintiff, Mr.
Moore, affirmed that he had the sole liberty
to sing the song called " Maggie May," and that
the defendants had sung the same witnout his consent.
The defendants denied the sole right, and also affirmed
that the plaintiff had given them permission to sing the
song in question. The plaintiff and Mr. Burgess were
the proprietors of the " Christy Minstrels," and the de-
fendants belong to the " Christy Coloured Minstrels."
Troupe, which had obtained great success in the provinces.
The plaintiff maintained that the defendants had sung
his song under the name of "Minnie Grey," the words
and music being precisely similar. Evidence having been
given for the plaintiffs that the defendants had sung the
song at Plymouth and elsewhere, and for the defendants
affirming that the song had been sung before the plaintiff
came to London at all, the jury retired, and, after a short
delay, found a verdict for the plaintiff ; 40s. damages.

THE Loss OF THE NORMANDY.—Cross actions for
damages have been begun in the Admiralty Court by the
owners of the two steamers, the Normandy and the Mary,
which came into collision last March off the Isle of Wight.
The Normandy sank, with a loss of thirty lives, and the
representatives of some of those who were lost, as well as
the owners of the cargo, have instituted proceedings
against the London and South-Western Company, who
were the owners of the Normandy. An application has
been made for an injunction to restrain these actions until
the cross-suits are disposed of, but the arguments in the
matter were not concluded when Sir R. Phillimore post-•
poned the case.

THE GREEN-EYED MONSTER IN A SMALL-WARE SHOP.
—A singular case, arising out of jealousy on the part of
the wife of a shopkeeper, was heard at the Liverpool
County Court. The plaintiff, Agnes Adams, a young woman
respectably connected and possessing considerable personal
attractions, sued Robert Carnathers, a smallware
dealer and hosier, carrying on business at 379, Scotland-
yard, for damages to the amount of £25, alleged to
have been sustained through her wrongful dismissal, and
the breach of an agreement to teach her the business in
which the defendant was engaged. It appeared that
mattershad gone on well for a time, until the smallware
dealer's wife became ungovernably jealous of Miss Adams,
and apparently without the slightest reason. For peace
sake the smallware man had to send the young lady away.
His Honour gave judgment for the plaintiff for £l5, with
costs on the higher scale.
A RECTOR REFUSING TO ACCEPT A SPONSER.-At the
Royal Court of Jersey, an action was brought by Philip
Ralph Becquet against the Rev. Phillip Guille, rector
of the parish of St. Martin, for refusing to allow the
plaintiff to act as godfather to a child in April,
1869. The baptismal party had assembled at s the
church, waiting the arrival of the rector, who on arriving a
few minutes afterwards sent word to the plaintiff that as
he was drunk he could not be allowed to take part in the
ceremgny. The consequence was that the father of the
child had to present it in the name of the plaintiff, who
had already signed the customary document. Plaintiff
claimed £lOO damages, and the court, after hearing twelve
witnesses to prove that he was sober, gave judgment for
£6,.and costs. The defendant called no witnesses. ,

The Government of the United States, as -Tell as
that of Great Britain (says the North German Corresgon-
dent) has accepted the proposal of the North German
Chancelry to engage in a common action against the
Chinese pirates. The fleets of the three nations
will, consequently, take part in a general plan of ope-
rations.