The Sun.
London, England, 1860-05-31 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.--(THIS DAY.)

DIVORCE COURT.
(Before Sir C. Creswell, Mr. Justice Wiles, and Mr. Jus•

Lice Hill.)

RlTCar,x- Y. nvron.. ANTI 11 ALL.

This was a suit instituted by George Bradford Kitchen
for a dissolution of marriage on the ground of his wife's
adultery with the co-respondent. The hearing of the case,
which commenced at the last sitting of the full court, was
resumed this morning.
It appeared that the parties, who are in humble life, re-
sided at Boston, Lincolnshire, and were married in 1850.
They continued to cohabit until 1853, when the adultery
pleaded was discovered by the husband.
The case, which was undefended, stood over for the pro-
duction of ad litional witnesses.

Emma Kitchen was examined, and stated that she was
the sister of the petitioner, and visited him and his wife at
Boston, in 1850. She remained about a week, and during
that time Mrs. Kitchen took her with her to the Railway
Tavern in the town, which was frequented by men em-
ployed on the railway, and women of bad character. Mrs.
Kitchen's conduct while at this place was most unbecom-
ing, and she was in the habit of using very bad language
to the persons in the house. Sho desired her not to tell the
petitioner of her visiting the house, as it would make him
angry. She called on them again in 1852 and 1853, and
found her sister-in-law with a pair of black eyes, and her
dress very disordered. She was frequently drunk, and the
petitioner knew nothing of her conduct. He was in the
habit of going out to work, and remaining away for some
days; and though he occasionally scolded his wife, his
general treatment of her was very kind. From a letter
which she received in 1853 she afterwards went to Peter-
borough, where her brother and his wife were then living.
She saw the latter, who was drunk and dirty, aad who
said that she acted in such a manner that her husband
would never forgive her. They then separated, and had
not since cohabited.

The Court considered this evidence sufficient, and de-
creed the dissolution of the marriage.

THIS DAY'S MARKETS.

MR. BRIGHT AT BIRMINGRAM.

BIRMINGHAM, MAY 30.

A town meeting on the subject of the Govern-
ment Reform Bill was held in the Town-hall here
to-night. It was convened by the Mayor, upon a
requisition signed by about 1,500 persons. The
Mayor presided. _ _

At the time his warship took the chair (20 minutes
before eight) the ball was about two-thirds full.
A letter from Mr. Scholefield was read, apologis-
ing for his absence. Letters of a similar character
were read from Mr. P. H. Muntz and others of the
Reform party.

Mr. Alderman BALDWIN (papermaker) moved the
following resolution :

" That, inasmuch as the Government Reform Bill
will considerably extend the privileges
.of voting
among the working classes, this meeting, while
asserting the right to a more comprehensive mea-
sure, and especially regretting that it does not pr?-
vide a lodger franchise, is of opinion that the bill is
entitled to the candid support of all friends of Par-
liamentary reform."
Mr. I. LORD, Dissenting minister, seconded the
resolution, which was carried unanimously.
Mr. Alderman HAWKES moved the second reso-
lution :

" That this meeting, having observed with ap-
prehension and disappointment the various obstacles
raised by some nominal supporters as well as by
avowed opponents to hinder the progress of the
Reform Bill in order to insure its defeat, earnestly
urges upon Parliament to proceed with the same
with all possible despatch."
Mr. H. W. TYNDALL, solicitor, seconded the re-
solution. As to the interference with the House of
Commons on the Paper Duty Bill, he thought that
Mr. Gladstone had got himself into the difficulty by
not adhering to precedent, simply moving a resolu-
tion remitting the paper duties. The Reform Bill
he found fault with, because it did not contain a
clause for the ballot.
The resolution was carried.
Mr. C. SMITH, who avowed himself a working
man, moved the next resolution :

" That this meeting records its emphatic protest
against the disparaging terms employed with refer-
ence to .the industrious population by members of
both Houses of Parliament in the course of the re-
cent debates on the Reform Bill, and this meeting
declares that such aspersions are in the highest de-
gree unjust and undeserved, and demand the severest
condemnation."

The resolution and another of a kindred character
having been carried,
_ _

Mr. LAWDEN moved, and Mr. MIDDLEMORE, a
borough magistrate, seconded, a resolution expres-
sive of confidence in Messrs. Scholefield and Bright,
and of condemnation of the unjust imputations and
cowardly attacks which had been from time to time
made upon Mr. Bright, in consequence of his fear-
less advocacy of the cause of the people.
Mr. BRIGHT said, that he felt sure there was not
a man in the confines of the kingdom who would
express a doubt as to the earnestness in which the
people of Birmingham had at all times exhibitedin
the cause of Parliamentary reform, and never was
that more required than at this moment. He had
witnessed the meeting of to-night with more plea-
sure than on any former occasion since he had been
politically connected with the borough, because on
no occasion had there been so much earnestness in the
speeches delivered, or more interest manifested in the
subject than on that occasion, and this was most
necessary, for the battle in which they were en-
gaged was not over, neither was it likely to be over.
They knew in what manner the question of reform
had been treated by both parties in the House of
Commons. Those who sat on the Ministerial
benches, and those who hoped to get there—all who
were supposed by the press to be alone fit to govern
the country, had admitted that an extension of the
suffrage was necessary; and yet, after all the pro-
mises made, there was still the disposition to deprive
the people of their political rights. He remarked
on some admissions which had been made respect-
ing the Reform Bill of 1832, and went on to re-
mark that those who had opposed the £lO franchise
then were for its perpetuity now, but expressed it
as his opinion that that which was wise in 1832
would be wise now, adding to those votes a still
larger number, thereby giving stability to the
Government and spreading content among all
classes of the people. \Valli' reference to the
borough franchise, as proposed 'under the Govern-
ment bill, he said that to substitute a higher one
would be to cheat the people, and to destroy what
faith remained in those who were thought to be the
loading men in the government of the country.
His highest estimate in the increase of the consti,
tuency under the new measure was 350,000. This
small number out of 7,000,000 some of Lord Derby's
friends regarded as " dangerous and revolutionary."
He alluded to speeches of Mr. Disraeli and Sir Bul-
wer Lytton on this question. With reference to
that of the last, he designated it as a speech of
elaborate eloquence, but wanting in the kernel and
soul of true eloquence—it wanted one particle of
truth. It contained everything about the fancy
democrats of two thousand years ago, but nothing
with regard to the character and rights of the
population of this country of the present day. He
spoke of an expression used by one whom he desig-
nated as "one of the titled feeble of the House of
Commons," who had expressed an opinion that if
the Reform Bill passed the working classes might
meddle with the " incidence of taxation." He re-
ferred to the circumstances abundant upon the re-
jection of the Reform Bill of the Derby Govern-
ment last year, and said that that party appeared
disposed to behave as honourably now as they
did thirty years ago. In reference to this
question elaborate and unfortunate slanders
were circulated against the people, of which
some day they might take advantage. He paid a
tribute to the spirit of endurance and other high
qualities displayed by the industrial population of
this country. He remarked on their obedience to
the laws, and expressed an opinion that nothing
could equal the blindness of those who charged
such a class with meditating the overthrow of the
constitution under which their forefathers had.
lived ; but the vast industry of the people the go-
verning class valued only because it afforded the
means by which a vast amount of taxes might be
raised. The hon. gentleman next alluded to the
recent conduct of the House of Lords on the Paper
Duty Bill. There, he said, was an irresponsible
hereditary body, famed for no deeds or services to
the State, who neither attended on platforms nor
issued addresses, nor received votes, seeking to be
their masters, and exercisinr, a power in 1860 un-
known and unrecognised byt' their forefathers for
centuries. It was in 1860 that this new monster
made its appearance, and it was for the people to
extirpate it at once, to put such a ban upon it at
once that it might never be heard of again. No
duty could be worse than the paper duty which it
was sought to retain ; it was a tax on their books,
on their amusements, on their hours of leisure and.
intellectual culture. The treaty with France would.,
be productive of the greatest advantage to both.
countries. A Government which could inaugurate.
such a policy and a Chancellor of the Exchequer
who would make it the pivot of his Budget, were
entitled to the moral support of the whole of the
industrial population. Mr. Bright resumed his
seat amid immense cheering.
At the time he concluded there were about 5,000
people in the hall.