The Sun.
London, England, 1846-10-20 00:00:00

BRISTOL CONSISTORY COURT

JONES V. JONES.

This long-talked of suit for divorce, on the ground of
adultery, occupied the Court during the whole of Thurs-
day and Friday.
The promoter, Mr. Edward Jones, an extensive to-
bacco manufacturer, of Bristol, prayed a decree of divorce
a mensa et thoro from Elizabeth Jones, his wife, by
reason of her having committed adultery. The wife, by
her responsive allegations, charged adultery and cruelty
on the part of the husband.
For the promoter a great number of witnesses had
been examined, with a view to prove that Mrs. Jones
had committed adultery with a gentleman named Ward,
another named Lansdowne, and with several others
whose names to the husband were unknown. The par-
ties had been married since 1829, and had had eight
children, of whom four survive. Their private dwelling-
house was in College-green, and Mr. Jones was neces-
sarily from home a great deal in the conduct of his buil-
ness; and it was charged that Mrs. Jones took advan-
tage of his absence to dishonour him. The witnesses
were mostly persons who had lived in the service of the
parties. and they deposed to having seen Mrs. Jones
and Mr. Ward lying on the sofa together upon
different occasions, to Mrs. Jones having been seen
on his bed, to their repeatedly kissing each other,
and to the lady having more than once said that she
loved Mr. Ward's little finger better than her husband's
whole person, that he ought to have been her husband,
and that she wished her husband might be brought home
dead, as Ward would then marry her. In regard to Mr.
Lansdowne, it was sworn that he and Mrs. Jones had
been in the parlour together with the door locked, and
that she had been seen in an indecent position before
him. On the more general allegations of adultery the
evidence was, that various gentlemen were in the habit
of calling in Mr. Jones's absence ; that they were asked
into the parlour with his wife, when the door was
often locked, the servants being charged by Mrs.
Jones not to come near it while any one was there ;
that, upon their leaving, Mrs. Jones's dress was ob-
served to be disordered ; that she was in the habit cf
sending round letters to gentlemen in her husband's ab-
sence, and that the gentlemen then called ; and that upon
one cccasion she was followed to a house of bad character
with a gentleman. One witness, a girl named Wade, in a
supplementary examination filed after the suit had pro-
ceeded some way, deposed to having witnessed a distinct
act of adultery with Mr. Ward; but this statement was
at variance with her former one, in which, although
stating circumstances from which adultery might be in-
ferred, she declared that she had never seen any crimi-
nality between the parties.
Mr. Stone, for the wife, insisted that the witnesses
against her were unworthy of credit, and that, suppos-
ing their statements to be true, it was impossible to come
to a belief that the husband was not cognizant of her pro-
ceedings.

For the defence, witnesses were also examined to speak
to an act of adultery by the husband with a girl named
Smith, and to indelicate conduct to others.
The evidence in support of the allegation of cruelty
was very contradictory, some witnesses declaring Mr.
Jones to have been kind and indulgent to a fault, while
others stated that they had seen him beat his wife se-
verely with his fists, and even with a poker, and that on
an average (according to one witness) he used to fight
with her twice a week.

The Learned CHANCELLOR (Dr. Phillimore) took time
to consider his judgment.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-HOUSE.
Joseph Chambers was brought before Alderman Fare-
brother, charged with having committed a robbery in
the house of Mr. Isaacs, merchant, in whose service he
was engaged as errand boy.
Mrs. Barrow, sister-in-law to Mr. Isaacs, in whose
house she resided, stated, that she had left her gold
watch, gild chain, and two gold rings, which were worth
13/. or 20/., upon the first-floor. The prisoner went out
on Tuesday, and did not return, and after his departure
the property was missed. The witness met the prisoner
on Saturday evening near the Surrey Theatre, and placed
him in the custody of a policeman. Without receiving
any promise of pardon, the lad acknowledged the mo-
ment he saw the witness that he had robbed her, and he
said he had pledged the goods at the shops of different
pawnbrokers.
The policeman complained to the Alderman that he
had found amongst some of the pawnbrokers disinclina-
tion to give him the usual facilities.
The prisoner was remanded till Wednesday, and
Alderman FA.REBROTHER directed that the pawnbrokers
complained against for incivility should be denied the
usual expenses paid after trial.
Emma Neal, a person who was recognised by the
police as an old rogue in the habit of watching and rob-
bing children sent after errands, was accused of having
stolen a saucer and three-pence halfpenny from three
very young children.
The prisoner was seen by a person, who suspected her
honesty, to follow the children, who were going to pur-
chase butter. She went up to one of them—a boy about
four years and a half old—and, giving him a halfpenny,
took from him the saucer and halfpence, telling him to
go on, and she would follow him with the butter. The
child ran on exulting, and witness observing that the
prisoner passed the butter shop and was getting away,
topic her into custody.
The prisoner declared that she had no dishonest inten-
tion, but that, thinking such young persons ought not to
entrusted with money, she was acting the part of a
mother to them in taking care of the money, with which
she was about to purchase the butter, but, by the merest
accident, she passe(' the shop.
Alderman FAREBROTHER—Prisoner, you are an old
hand at robbing children.
The prisoner never thought of so mean and vile a
hing. " What, me rob a mere baby?—not a bit of it."

Alderman FAREBROTHER—I'II make you sick of .
Yon must go to Bridewell for three months.
Patrick Leary, a young fellow who came over from
Ireland in the hopping season, was charged with having
broken two windows in the house of Mr. Jopp, the re-
lieving officer of the City union.
Mr. Lloyd, assistant relieving officer, stated that,
about two o'clock on Saturday last, the defendant ap-
plied for relief, and witness requested that he would'
wait his turn. While witness was writing down his name
he went out and deliberately broke two panes of glass
with a stone.
Alderman FAREBROTHER—Prisoner, why did you
break the window, when the officer was complying with
your request ? Leary—Why, I was in a hurry to get
back to my own country, and they didn't seem to care a
pin about it, and I thought the best way to talk to him
was with a paving-stone in my hand. I want to go off
to Ireland at once.
Alderman FAREI3ROTHER said the union had no longer
the power to grant passes. That authority lay with the
parishes, and as the Irish who came over to hop were in
the habit of sending back their profits, and then return-
ing upon charity, the parish officers thotight it necessary
to exercise caution. The fine upon the prisoner was
four shillings.
The prisoner-4 have no money to give away.
Alderman FAREBROTHER—Tnen you must go to
Bridewell for fourteen days, and that judgment includes
scanty allowance of food.
CL ERK EN W E L L.
Mr. James Slack, Haekney•terrace, and Mr. Thomas
Davis were charged by William Gulliver, toll-collector,
at Mil's- pond gate, Islington, with having violently as-
saulted him whilst in the execution of his duty, under
the following circumstances :
Complainant deposed that on Sunday evening, at twenty
minutes past eight o'clock, the defendants and two other
gentlemen drove up to the toll gate, Ball's- pond, in a
tour-wheeled chaise, with a pony, which Mr. Slack was
driving. Witness asked him for the payment of the toll.
Mr. Slack said it was paid. Witness said " You must
show the ticket before you can pass," and not producing
it, he laid hold of the reins of the pony, when Mr. Slack
whipped the pony, and then commenced horsewhipping
witness violently, whilst he !lilt retained his hold of the
reins. They drove furiously on for about fifty yards.
Witness pursued them, and the pony was stopped by a
neighbour, who remonstrated with the defendants
Witness requested Mr. Slack to give his card of address,
but he said he had not got one, and Mr. Davis then
offered a card with his (Mr. Davis's) name upon it, but
no address was upon it. Witness refused it, and insisted
on having Mr. Slack's name and address. Mr. Slack
again whipped on the pony, and Mr. Davis struck him
repeatedly with his umbrella, and he (witness) was
obliged to defend himself as well as he could until a
policeman came up, and the defendants were given into
custody. One of the gentlemen at the back of the chaise
also assaulted witness, when his hat fell off. He made
off, leaving his hat behind him.
Mr. Levy, the lessee of the toll, who attended for
the complainant, said he had been a toll-collector for
23 years, and was a well-conducted man.
Mr. Slack, in his defence, said he admitted having
horsewhipped the complainant, who seized the reins of
the pony, and backed them near the kerb-stone, by which
he felt his life and the lives of his friends to have been
in danger. They had paid the toll, and Mr. Davis had
the ticet, and was not allowed time to produce it.
The complainant became very violent, and struck Mr
Davis.

Mr. James Cardin°, North-place, Ball's-pond, and
sereral other respectable witnesses, corroborated the
testimony of complainant.

Mr. liavis said that he had possession of the ticket,
which he put into his hat with some others, and having
on his great-coat, and heing muffled up in a shawl, he
was some time before he could produce the ticket. The
conduct of complainant was violent, insolent, and over-
hearing. Ire seized and struck at him, when he certainly
did strike him with his umbrella in his own defence.

Mr. COMBE inquired whether they had any witnesses?
Mr. Slack replied that they had the two gentlemen
who were with them, but Mr. Holstock, one of them,
had important business that day at Putney, and could
not attend.

Complainant said this was the gentleman that struck
him and left his hat behind.
Mr. William Holland, of Devonshire-street, Queen-
square, who said he was a merchant's clerk, deAsed
that he was sitting at the back of the chaise Ph.
llolstock. They lost their way, and were considering
the best direction to take when complainant asked for
the toll. Mr. Slack said "It is all right," and the
former insisted on seeing the ticket, lie seized the