The Sun.
London, England, 1867-07-13 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE—This Day.

COURT OF DIVORCE.
(Before Sir J. W. Wilde and a Common Jury.)
HATTEN ~ HATTEN.

This was a suit instituted to obtain a judicial separation
by the wife on the ground of cruelty, &c. The cruelty
was denied, and provocation alleged.
Mr. M. Chambers and Dr. Swabey appeared for the pe-
titioner, and Dr. Spinks, Q C., and Mr. George Browno for
tfie respondent.
It al reared that the parties were married at Deal in
February, 1865, the petitioner being a widow with one scn
aged six years. She had been the wife of a
surgeon in the navy, and had £7O a year income, which
ceased when she married. The respondent had been in
business but had retired to Deal, where ho lived with thro •
daughters, who kept his house. with the consent of the
petitioner the eldest daughter continued to manage the
house. About a month after their marriage her husband
began to treat her badly, and she wes so astonished
at the change that she asked Doctor Roberts
to come and see her, and ho did so. Soon after
he was gone ho began to illtreat the child. In April
one morning, lie swore at her, because she would not get
up early enough for him. Ile used to swear at the child,
and threatened to do for it. Oa one occasion ho said he
would throw it out of window. Sho was so frightened
that she sent a note to her sister at Sandown, but the
respondent stopped the servant and took it from her,
and came with it to petitioner and told her so. They
went to London in July. During that visit at dinner one
day ho took the child up and said that "he would do for it
at last." Ile took the child by the arm and held it up, and
the child cried and she took it from him, and slapped
him several times on the face. When they got
back to their home, on one occasion when she
want down to draw the beer in the cellar, peti-
tioner hoard one of the daughters say that she was
a pauper, and living on their mamma's money. She told
that to the respondent, and he replied it was quite true
what she said. It appeared that the petitioner had been
subjected to other acts of violence in the July and August
of that year, and at last she left the house and put the
matter in the hands of her solicitor. She took proceedings
against her husband before the magistrates, and he was
bound over to keep the peace. She had not seen her hus-
band till yesterday since.
The case was proceeding when wo went to press.

POLICE INTELLIGEACE.—This Day.

MARLBORUGLI-STREET.

OUTRAGEOUS ASSAULT ON A LIEUTENANT-COLONEL.—
Thomas WooHord, a law-writer, was charged before ➢ir.
Tyrwhitt with the following unprovoked assault on Lieu-
tenant-Colonel Henry Atkins Bowyer, of the Junior United
Service Club :

Colonel Bowyer stated that on his return from Guildhall
yesterday evening, and while proceeding up St. Alban's-
place, towards his lodgings, he observed the prisoner mak-
ing signs to another man. As soon as the prisoner observed
him he assumed to be very drunk, although there had been
nothing before about his appearance indicating that ho was
so ; and as he was entering his lodgings the prisoner, with-
out saying a word to him, gave him a violent blow un the
mouth, the result of the blow being that ho had been
unable to eat or sleep. The prisoner then put himself in
a position as if to strike him again, but his servant seized
him, and he was taken to the station by a constable.
John Mills, servant to the complainant, said he was in
the passage of the house, and on the door being opened
by the colonel the prisoner struck him in the mouth, and
he held the prisoner, who was afterwards handed over to
a constable.

Reuben Blazier, 158 C, proved taking the prisoner into
custody, and stated that he could not positively say
whether the prisoner was drunk or not.
Tho prisoner said be had nothing to ask the witnesses.
Mr. Tyrwhitt said such assaults were becoming very
common, and would be dealt with strongly. The prisoner
would be committed for two months, with hard labour.