The Sun.
London, England, 1860-02-10 00:00:00

• _
LAW INTELLIGENCE.—(This Day.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.

Poers preseno—The Lord Chancellor, Lord Brougham,
Lord Cranworth, Lord Chelmsford, and other Peers.

APPEAL-JUDGMENT-JOHNSTONE V. JOHNSTONE.

The Lord Chancellor was of opinion that the bond for
£1,600 was heritable and not moveable, but it was com-
petent to prove pro sit de jure that the agreement
in question was entered into in ignorance of the
parties' rights, and therefore it was not incumbent
on the Court of Session to decide that question, but it was
competent
_to grant an issue to try that question by a
jury.

Their lordships affirmed the decision of the Court of
Session in Scotland, and dismissed the appeal with costs,
A.PPBAL-JUDGMENT-COMISERCIAL BANK OF SCOTLAND

V. RHIND.
The Lord Chancellor was of opinion thaLthe pass-book in
question was not a probative document, and that the appellant
was not bound to prove the double entry of £BO in it script°
vel jorimento, but that he was entitled to prove the errone-
ous double entry of that sum in the passbook pro of de jure.
Their Lordships reversed the decision of the Court of
Session in Scotland, and allowed the appeal with, costs, and
remitted the case to the Court of Session to allow the proof
offered by the appellant. Respondents' costs in the Court
of Session to be set off against the appellant's costs.
APPEAL-JUDGMENT.-GLASGOW, BARIMEAD;AND NIEL-
STON DISTRICT RAILWAY COMPANY V. CALEDONIAN
RAILWAY, ET AL. EX PARTS AS TO CERTAIN RE-
SPONDENTS.

The Lord Chancellor was of opinion that the. Caledonian
Railway Company were liable to be rated for poor rates in
respect of their lease for 999 years, from the Barrhead
Railway Company of their line of railway within the Abbey
parish of Paisley. Their lordships reversed the decieion of
the Court of Session in Scotland, and allowed the appeal
with costs.

Costs of respondent in the Court of Session, and, tipper
ants' costs to be arranged.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
(Before Sir C. Cresswell and a Common Jury,)
COOK V. COOL-EXTRAORDINARY CASE.

This was the petition of the wife; praying fora judicial
separation from her husband on the ground of cruelty, to
which he pleaded a denial.

Dr. Phillimore. Q.C., and Mr. Layton were counsel for
the petitioner, and the respondent conducted his own case.
It appeared that the parties werd married in July.; 1858,
and separated the following June, during which time the
petitioner gave birth to a child. In about a fortnight after
the ill-treatment commenced, and continued till the peti
tuner was compelled to take protectionat her father's.

Mr. Percival stated that he wag the father of the peti-
tioner, and was an oilman and provision merchant in Valen-
tine-place, Blackfriar's-road. In the autumn of 1857; Mr.
Cook was introduced to him at Margate, and he came
afterwards to his house in town. He said -he was in the,
Temple, practising as a barrister, and that he was placed
there by his father, who was a very wealthy man, living in
Herefordshire, merely to prevent his leading an idle life.
After some time he stated that he had formed an attach-
ment for his daughter, and on his expressing a desire to
see his father in reference to the subject, he promised to
write to him. Some time afterwards he brought a person
whom he introduced as his father, and who stated he was
possessed of property in liereford, that he allowed his son
£5 a week, and would, on the marriage, place £5OO to his
credit at the bankers of the witness. When he said he
wished to visit his property, Mr. Cook, senior,
said he was staying with his father, who was
82 years old, in bad health, and could not be disturbed by
visitors. He mentioned that he had plenty of linen and
furniture with which he would supply his son, and that he
was well known to Messrs. Roberts and Curtis, the bankers,
a statement which proved to be unfounded, as he subse-
quently ascertained. After the marriage Cook's father said
to him, " What are you going to give them, now they are
going away ?" He was much surprised, but Mr. Cook
added, " Oh, you ought to make them a present in money."
He was quite surprised, but he borrowed £lO, which ho gave
the respondent. About two or three weeks after the mar-
riage Cook, senior, asked him to lend him £lOO, to prevent
his sacrificing some property, and that ho would remit it as
soon as he went to the country. He expressed his surprise
at tie time, but afterwards advanced it to him. He saw
him subsequently when he called and said he was to
cone down to his estato on the Ist of September
for a week's shooting. (Loud laughter.) Since
that time ho had neither seen nor heard from hint. Imme-
diately after the marriage the respondent went abroad
with his daughter, and on his return in about throe months
called on him and wanted him to lend him £io. He refused
to advance a farthing until he was informed where his.
father was to be found, or had received the 1100 he had
lent him.

The respondent then cross-examinel the witness after
the Old Bailey fashion anl created much laughter. The
latter denied that he had invited him to a goose dinner on
the day of their acquaintance. (Laughter.) He did not
ask him to his house In town. The reason he did not see
hls father at an earlier period of the acquaintance was, that
the respondent told him he was suffering from the bite and
kick of his horse. (Laughter.) The witness also denied
that he was acquainted with certain disreputable characters
or that ho had been engaged in transactions of a doultful
description.

Mrs. Cooke, the petitioner, was examined, and deposed
to different acts of ill-treatment on the part of the respon-
dent. Shortly after the marriage he abused her and made
use of the most profane language. On one occasion he
pinched her and spat in her face, and when she was far ad-
vanced in pregnancy ho struck her on the breast with his
closed fist. She suffered severely in her wrist from the
effects of his violence on one occasion, and her person was
frequentlyo
rcovered t h bruisesevidence from h s
adduced,
b ds
ueleor.
but the case
was not concluded when wo went to press.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Holroyd.)
IN R 1 BISHOP AND FARBRIDGE.
These bankrupts were described as of Cornhill, East
India merchants, and this was an adjourned examination
meeting.

A gentleman from the offices of Messrs. Wire and Child
appeared for the assignees, and said that the ac-
counts were very unsatisfactory, as the bankrupts had
kept neither day-book, cash-book, nor ledger, merely a
petty cash-book. The bankrupts had only been in business
for nine months, and he believed they now were indebted
to creditors £lO,OOO, and that there would be no assets.
Mr. Leo, the official assignee, said he had got in about
£2OO.

The solicitor continued, that during the short period he
had stated they had drawn out for their personal expenses
1600 each. The assignees were willing out of mercy to
allow the bankrupts to pass, but they must decidedly ob-
ject to any allowance being granted.
His Honour—You do not impute that they have con-
cealed any property.
The Solicitor----We cannot say. The affairs are in such a
state of confusion, but it is a most disreputable case.
His Honour—But, if you du not makes positive charge,
I am bound to make some allowance.
After some discussion,
His Honour granted allowances of Cl 10s. each per week,
up to the day originally appointed for the last examination.

POLICE INTELLIGENO7,-(THIS DAY.)

MA.RLBOROUGII-STREET.
WHOLECALE AND .SYSTEMATICTIC riI;;!:TDER BY SER-
VANTS.—Two men, waned John Connor and William
butcher;
Mead, in the employ of Mr. Herbert JAcison, pork
&c., Mount-street, Grosvexior-square, were charged before
Mr. Bingham with robbing their employer to a consider-
able extent.
Mr. Edward Lewis, of Great Marlborough-street, ap-
peared for the prisoners. The system pursued by the pri-
soners was this :—Every morning the refuse, consisting of
straw, :&c., on the shop being cleaned up, was put into a
basket kept for the purpose, and the prisoners took this
.op-
portunity of slipping into it any articles convenient,
pork,to h
igiands the of
basket sausages,to stable, c sanduch
then ae tongues,
conyayin
where they had a private store for their master's stock, and
then afterwards disposed of them, and there was very little
doubt that the practice had been going on to a considera • ble
extent and for a long time.

Inspector 'Webb, of the C division, on searching the box
of Mead, found a cigar case worth at least .£l, a gold
Albert chain, and several other articles, and £2 3s. 6d. in
gold and silver. In Connor's box, a Lank book for £8 re-
cently deposited, gold pin, ring, Albert chain, and £2 ss.
6d. in money were also found.
Mr. Lewis having addressed the magistrate, Mr. Bing-
ham, on the prisoners' behalf, and begging they might be
mercifully dealt with, owing to their previous, good cha-
racter.
They wore committed for six months with hard labour.
A PAIR OP AItTPUL 40DGERS.—Iienry Ricketts and
John Farmer, two lads, who stood in the dock seemingly
the pictures of injured innocence were charged as follows :
Gordon; 236 A, said that on the previous evening about
7 he saw the prisoners pass and repass the shop, 212, Picca-
dilly, Mr. Hill's, and placing himself in u doorway saw the
prisoner Farmer make two or three tugs at a railway rug,
hat in consequence of its being tied he failed in getting it
away, lie then took them into oustody, when Farmer gave
a false address. Ito found on them two silk handkerchiefs.
Farmer—Qh, it's where I used to live.
Gordon said he. knew Ricketts as a pickpocket and car-
riage thief, and the otlur prisoner had been in custody for
robbing a lady.
Lambert, 6S E, said they were well •known characters.
Ricketts said it was his poor old mother's "wipe" that
lt:&e found on him.

Farmer said h© took nailing, and that was why he was
" took."

Conlinitteil for three months each.

On Thursday next Mr. Locke King will move
for a bill for the further securing- the liberty of religious
worship.