The Sun.
London, England, 1867-06-20 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, JUNE 20, 1.86)1:

BRITISH POSSESSIONS.

66 68
103 104
id
4 44
5 0

100
too
100
all
100
100

50 55
99 101
103 IG4
110 111

.7 18

1101 I

1111 12

141 i

102

LAW INTELLIGENCE—This Day.

HOUSE OF LORDS.
TELVERTON, OTHERWISE LONGWORTII, AND
YELITERTON.

This long-pending case, which has so long oc -
cupied public attention, was put down for rehearing
this morning, but, in consequence of the indisposi-
tion of Mrs. Yelverton, was postponed for a week.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
'Sittings at N6.i Prius before Lord Chief Justice
Cockburn and a Special Jury.)
ACTON V. THE MIDLAND RAILWAY COMPANY.

Mr. Coleridge, Q.C., was counsel for the plain-
tiff, and the Solicitor-General for the defendant.
The action was brought to recover compensation
for injuries arising out of a collision on the Not-
tingham and Birmingham line. The defendants
merely pleaded that the plaintiff had accepted ,t3l
10s. as compensation for the injuries he had sus-
tained.

It appeared that the plaintiff was travelling from
Nottingham to Birmingham, on the 16th March,
1863, when the collision took place. lie was under
the care of Dr. Robertson, the company's doctor at
Nottingham, for a fortnight, and was persuaded by

him to accept the £3l iOs: in full compensation,
and to give a receipt for the same. The plaintiff
afterwards became gradually worse, and was com-
pelled to give up asituation which he held as foreman
to take another as relieving officer of the union
at Nottingham. The duties of this situation also,
though comparatively light, he was incompetent
to fulfil, and was obliged to appoint a deputy.
Finding that his health was so seriously affected
he applied in March, 1866, to the company
to give him such compensation as the
circumstances of his case warranted, but
was informed that his claim could not be enter-
tained, as the company acted on the principle that
when a party accepted a given sum in full compen-
sation he was not entitled to any more.
The medical evidence was to the effect that the
injuries of the plaintiff were of a nature that
rendered it doubtful whether he would ever recover.

The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, and
assessed the damages at £1,500.

COURT OF DIVORCE.
(Before the Right Hon. Sir J. P. Wilde.)

INWOOD V. INWOOD, BARNES, AND BASFORD.

This was a suit instituted to procure a dissolu-
tion of marriage on the ground of the wife's adultery.
It appeared that the parties were married at St.
Barnabas, St. Luke's, Middlesex, in Sept., 1843.
The husband was a builder, and had after his mar-
riage lived with an uncle until 1856, when the
petitioner was obliged to go and manage a sister's
farm about 14 miles from London, and left his wife
and five children in London. During the time he
was away it appeared that the alleged adultery
w•as committed.

John Inwood said that he was the uncle of the
petitioner, and they had lived in his house. He be-
came bankrupt during the railway mania, but he
still continued to live with them. They removed to
Birmingham, and the petitioner used to come to see
his wife once a week. lie allowed her money suffi-
cient for her use. In 1857 he was suddenly called
to hear rumours about his niece and one of the co-
respondents. She protested her innocence, and he be-
lieved it, but she afterwards confessed that she was
guilty. Her husband forgave her, and they went to
live in another house. lie still lived with them,
but her conduct became so bad that he was obliged
to take separate lodgings. She would be out till
12 and 1 o'clock, and did not seem to care for any-
thing. On one occasion he saw Barnes in a private
room with her. She often had what she called
" female friends" to tea. After he had left her
three or four days she brought her son to him and
the key of the house, and went to live with Mrs.
Bragg. He called a day or two after and found
her crying, because she was afraid of Barnes's wife.
She said she was truly sorry that she ever left
her home, and begged him to take care of her little
boy. He scut her up a few shillings occasionally
when she begged very hard. lie went down to
Liver! 001, and saw Mrs. Inwood in the presence of
Mrs. Galloway, and saw the co-respondent Basford
in town. lie said that " was all right, but that he
did not know that she was a married woman."
Mrs. Bragg, Mrs. Galloway, and others gave con-
firmatory evidence.

It was urged on behalf of the co-respondent Bas-
ford that he was not aware that she was a married
woman, and therefore trusted to be excused from
the costs.

The Court granted a decree nisi, with costs
against Barnes.

LOFTUS V. LOFTUS.

This was a petition on the part of Lord Loftus
for restitution of conjugal rights.

Mr. Coleridge applied for a postponement of the
case on the ground of the absence of a material
witness.

The case was accordingly postponed for a week.

SULLY V. SULLY AND ANOTHER.

This was a petition presented by the husband,
praying for dissolution of marriage on the ground
of adultery. It appeared that the respondent
some time after marriage gave way to habits of
imtcmperance, and eventually so conducted herself
as to lead to the institution of the present suit.
His lordship granted a decree nisi.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—This Day.

--

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

EXTRAORDINARY CHARGE OF WANTON DAMAGE.
—John Clare, described as a jewel case maker, of
9, George-street, Langharn-street, and Elizabeth
Clare, his wife, were charged, before Mr. Knox
with wantonly damaging some panes of glass, the
property of Mr. George Lines, printer, of No. 2,
Middleton-buildings, and also some panes of glass
at other houses in the-same place.
Mr. Lines stated that several panes of glass in his
windows had been cut during the past two or three
nights, and some of the windows in other houses
near him.

Mr. Chas. Sheppard, of No. 11, Middleton-build
inns, said that in consequence of several windows in
the place being cut lately, he sat up last night to
watch, with the view of detecting the person doing
it. He saw the male prisoner, who was accom-
panied by his wife, first cut the window of the
previous witness's house, then the window of the
next house, and just as he was going to cut the
window of the third house he caught hold
of him, and told him that he would
have him locked up, upon which he ran
away. He then gave the prisoner and his wife into
custody. The female prisoner took a ring from her
husband, and bad an opportunity of getting rid of
it. The male prisoner was extremely anxious for
him not to press the charge.
The male prisoner said there was only one window
cut, but the witness stated that he saw him delibe-
rately cut three.
The male prisoner said that when caught by and
struggling with the last witness he had his gold
watch stolen.
Mr. Knox said it served the prisoner right, and
he would like to know what business no prisoner
had to destroy persons property as he had done.

The witness said that on Monday night four
windows were cut, some of the glass nearly through,
no doubt by a diamond ring the male prisoner was
wearing, and last night he distinctly saw the pri-
soner do it.

The male prisoner said he was very sorry, and
compensation. It was a fool-
hardy llng t o
case
ihe makevou mit.ldad
in answer to Mr.
Knox the prisoner said be was a jewel-case maker.
Mr. Knox said the female prisoner did not appear
to have taken an active part in the matter, and as
there was not enough to convict her, she would be
discharged.

Police-constable lolder, 161 E, proved taking
the prisoners into custody. Nothing was found on
the male prisoner with which a window could be cut.
Mr. Knox said that no doubt that was got rid of.
lle would not ruin the prisoner by sending him to
prison without the option of paying a fine. He
should order him to pay 3s. for the damages and a
fine of £5 or a month.
THAMES. •

EXTENSIVE ROBBERY BY A SOLDIER IN THE
TOWER ,--Charles Stewart, aged 19, a very tall

man, a corporal in the Ist battalion of the Grena-
dier Guards, quartered in the Tower of London,
was brought up, on remand, before Mr. Paget,
charged with stealing £145 in Bank of England
notes and two gold rings, the property and monies
of Capt. H. M. C. Legh, of the same regiment,
who now attended for the fir, st time.

The prosecutor stated that on the morning of
Tuesday, the 11th of the prese a month, ho placed
a small pocket-book, containing two £5O and nine
£5-notes and two gold rings in a drawer in his
dressing-room. He missed the notes and rings the
same night between 11 and 12 o'clock. The drawer
and the door of the room were not locked.
Mr. John William Batton, clerk to Messrs. Cox
and Co., army agents, identified two £5O notes
which he paid to Captain Legh on the 27th of last
m on t b.

Mr. Henry EinbWon, steward of the Guards
Club, Pall Mall, said that six £5 notes produced
were a portion of ten he paid to Captain Legh in
change of a £5O note.
Mr. Richard Adye Burley, a clerk in the Bank
of England, produced two cancelled notes for £5O
each, and six cancelled notes for £5 each, all paid
into the Bank on the 12th of June.

• Jacob Posner, a Jew outfitter, of No. 22, Wliite-
chapel-road, received one of the £5O notes and three
of the £5 notes from the prisoner on the 12th June,
and obtained £65 in gold for them at the Bank.
The prisoner endorsed the notes " Gordon Ca-
meron," and sail he had won a good deal of money
on the Derby race at Epsom. He gave the whole
of the gold to the prisoner, who paid him £5 13s.
for clothes he purchased, and took them away. On
the previous day, June 11, the prisoner paid him
30s. for two shirts and a waistcoat he purchased.

The prisoner cross-examined Posner, who denied
thit he had received £2O of him to take care of.

The prisoner insisted that he had deposited £2O
with Posner, which the Jew stoutly denied.
Mr. Alfred Knight, watchmaker and jeweller, of
No. 83, High-street, Whitechapel, sold a lever
watch, gold chain, locket, and ring, to the prisoner
on the 12th of June, for which the prisoner ten-
dered in payment three £5 notes, and after deduct-
ing £l2 65., the price of the goods, retained £2 14s.
The prisoner endorsed the notes "Cameron Gor-
don," and said he came from Yorkshire, and won
£2OO at Epsom on the Derby day.
In answer to Mr. Paget, Posner and Knight said
the prisoner was in his soldier's uniform when he
came to their shops and made purchases.
Geo. Clarke, detective sergeant, said he accosted
the prisoner on Monday last in the Tower, and on
letting him know the charge, he said he did not steal
but was guilty of passing the notes ; and that he
had found one £5O note, six £5 notes, two rings,
and a cigar case under a stone near the Tower ditch.
He found 10s. Bd. on the prisoner. He ascertained
that the day after Captain Legh missed his notes
and rings the prisoner invested £3O in a savings
bank.

Mr. Paget—Two 150 notes which have been
identified were paid into the Bank of England on
the same day. One was paid to Posner, while
the other was passed by the prisoner.
_ _

Clarke—The second £5O note was _ indorsed
" Webb." I have my suspicions where. it was
passed. _ _

The whole of this evidence having been read by
Mr. Harm, the second clerk, the prisoner was
called upon for his defence, and after receiving the
usual caution he said, "No defence, not till my
trial."

Mr. Paget committed the prisoner to Newgate for
trial, and said—lt's an unfortunate piece of care-
lessness for a gentleman to put £145 and two
gold rings in a drawer that was unlocked, and in
a room the door of which was unfastened. I
cannot too strongly reprobate the system which
enabled a private soldier in uniform to obtain
change for a £5O note and three £5 notes, all
stolen, at an outfitter's shop, without any in-
quiries being made. It is perfectly monstrous.