The Sun.
London, England, 1858-11-27 00:00:00

1141 143

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER 27, I'BsB.

FOREIGN.

Closing I Business
Share Railways. 1 Paid. prim Done.

[Antwerp & Rotterdam
'Ardennes
nalb&S.Fran.,Lita.7p,c
'Belgian East. Junction
IlezierS to Graissessas,
(Dutch
Mine &
IDu:ch IthenL•3ll
Eastern of France .
Euphrates Vallev
Great Central of France
'Gt. Luxem.. Con. shs..
Italian unction
Constance & Rale
Lierre and Turnhout...
Lombardo Venetian....
Lucca & Pistoja, 5 p.elpt.
Lyons and Geneva ....
Maria Antonia .....
Do. do. New
Namur and Liege •
Do. do. 6 p. c.
Northern of France...,
Do. New Shares
Norwep;ian Trunk Pref.
Ottoman, gua. 6 per cent
Paris,Lyons, and Medit. -
Paris and Orleans
Recife& S. Fran. (Pern.)'
gua: 7 p. et. (Lim.)
Riga and Dunaburg....
'Rome and Frascati
Royal Danish
Royal Swedish
Do. 7 per cent. Pref
Sambre and Meuse
Do. 5; per cent. Pref.
Southern of France
West Flanders ...
Do. 54 p. c. Preference .
W. & N.W. of France • 1
Western of Austria
Western of SWitzerlaud
Wiesbaden

5 51
p
d Hp
1
8 9
21 2i
lld
270 28}
—p

7i 7;

4 41 p
- -
244 254

21 22
39f 3917
—p
tif 91
3 1 .1
35 351
55 56
d

n 81
9 91
23 23
51 5
231 24

Do 8 per cent. Pref
Zealand

Share

BRITISH POSSESSIONS.

8i i

Closiurr Rusiness
Railways. iPaid. Pricey. Doi,

Atlantic & St Lawrence
Leased at 6 per cent ;
Bom.,Baroda&Cent.lnd
gu. 5 percent
Do
Do. Addit. Capital A
Do. Do.
Buffalo and Lake Hurcin
Do. Neni •
Buffalo,Brant.&Godrich
6 p. ct. bds. 1 Aug., 1872
Do. do. 1 July, 1873
Do. do. 1 Juno, 1874
Clcutta.&S.Eastrn.Lim.
Cape,Eastn.Prov.(Lim.)
Cape Town & Dock Scrip
Central Oude (Limited)
Ceylon Guaranteed 6p.c
Demerara •
Eastern Bengal.gu.sp.c
East Indian, gu. 5 p. c
Do. C Shares
Do. E Shares -Kai
Do. Jubbnfpore
D 0.44 p.c. Bds. pay.'s9
G eelong& Mel. gua.s p. s.
Geelong Corporation fi
per cent. Bonds
Grand. Trunk of Canada
Do. 6 p.c. Deben.,pay.'7B
Do. 6 per cent. Pref.
Gt.lndiaPenin.gua.sp.c
Do. New, gua.s per cent
Do. do
Gt.S.of Ind.Lim.—Strip
guaranteed 5 per cent.
Gt.W. of Canada Shares
Do. New -
Do. Bonds pay. '76,with
ept. till '6O
Do do. '73 till '6O
Do. do. '73 -without opt
Do. 51 p. c. do. '77 do
Madras, guar., 41 p,
Do. do. per cent.
Do. 41 p: c. Extension
Do. Third Ex. gua.s.p.c
Do. Fourth do.
Melb. Corp. 6 p.c. Bonds
Newßrunswick&Canda.
Ry.&Land(Lim.)g.6pc
Class ACapitl.Share
Do. do. Land do
Do. do. B. Capital do
Do. do. Land do
Northof India Tramroad
Limited, Scrip
Oude (Limited)
Scinde
Do.
Do. New
is
Do. Punjaub •
Do. Indus. St. Flo b•44;
St. Andrews & Quebec A
Trinidad(Limited) Scrip

I all
9
all

(par iPi

ta par
7 71
14 13 d
80 85
77 80
74 77

204
20i
100 1
100

1 10-0
100
1. 3, 0.

25.
25. Rd,
2
all
5
10f)
all

IiPI

174
20
Stock,

par
107 1071

1 lip!

BRITISH MINES.

37 8

211 1

pm
171 18

1061

Business
Done.

2.i
ii

23} 3

Bas less
Dobe,s

301 1

111 i

LAW INTELLIGENCE.--( THIS .DAY .)

COURT OF ERROR.
OLMIAM V. BLOWN.
The further hearing of this part-heard cause was resumed
this morning.
The arguments will not be concluded to-day.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
(Sittings at Nisi Prius before Lord Campbell, and a
Special Jury.)
MARSHALL T. CROCKFORD.

Mr. Edwin James, Q.C., Mr. Hawkins, and Mr. J. A
Russell appeared for the plaintiff ; Mr. M. Chambers, Q.C.,
Mr. Karslake, and Mr. Maenamara for the defendant.

The case, which occupied the whole of yesterday, was
resumedthiamorning.

The plaintiff, Henry Marshall, was formerly the editor of
a sporting newspaper called the Field, of which the defen-
dant, John Crockford, was, in part proprietor; but,
having resigned his office of editor of the defendant's
newspaper in November, 1857, he joined with some
other parties in starting a rival newspaper called the
Review; the Country Gentleman's Journal,;of which he be-
camo the editor. He brought, the present action against
his former employer to recover damages for several libels
which the latter had published respecting him, imputing to
him dishonesty in certain transactions respecting dogs and
guns, while he was editor of the Field, so as to compromise
the interests of that journal, The defendant pleaded the
general issue and also a justification, alleging that the {mid
libels were true ; and ho relied also on the publications
being privileged and bona fitre
At the conclusion of the evidenco, his Lordship summed
up, and

The Jury after some delibeiation,.returued a verdict for
he plaintiff.—Damages, le,

BAIL COURT.

:sittings at Nisi Prius after term, before Mr. Justice Cromp.

ton and Common Jury.)

BREACH OF PROMISE OF XAURTAGE-,-CORBUT V. WEMYSS

The hearing of this ease was-resumed this morning, a
report of which will be found. in another column of The
Sun.

•
The declaratiot stated that the plaintiff and defendant
had agreed to marry each ether, and that although the
plaintiff was willing to marry-the defendant, the defendant
had neglected and refused to married the plaintiff, The
' defendant pleTadel first that ho dilta agree 10 itarry the
plaintiff; second, that the Plaintiff was not ready and willing
pm to marry hini; third, that he did not commit any breach ;
and, fourth, that the plaintiff Jiad discharged and exone-
rated him from the said agreement.
107} i 7
The learned judge having summed up,

The jury returned a verdict for the Plaintiff.—Damages,
£l5O.

DIVORCE COURT.
(Before the Judge:Ordinary.)
MARCUMONT V. 114ARCHMONT.

Mr. Sergeant Pigott this morning continued the cross-
examination 'of Mr. Marehmoat. The rev, gentleman
said—

I never told Tobin I owed £50,000, and I would not leave
the house until I had £25,000. I never said anything about
it. I did not write my wife's name in a cab. I never said
anything about the ground being cursed. Referring to the
subject of 145., before that there was a quarrel about 16s.
Louis and Tobin were present. On the 15th of May the
quarrel took place about the 14s. Mrs. Marchmont did not
give me a cheque for £lOO a week before. The week after
that I wanted 14s. Mrs. Xarchmont refused to
give it me. I never threw her upon the
sofa. I said I would exercise the legitimate rights of
a husband and would have the 14s. I never threw her
on the sofa. I put her on the sofa. I said, " Carry,
you should not 'set me at defiance about the 145." She re-
plied, " You should not make me afraid of you." She took
out her purse and dashed it upon the table. I never said I
thought it would go hard with tile if'it came to judicial pro-
ceedings. I never asked Mrs. Marchmont to sign blank
cheques on the 27th of May. I swear I did not, nor at any
time about that period. About the accusation of spending
money improperly,.' I showed Mrs. Marchmont my
cheque-book. The proposal to.shov the cheque-book arose
with Mrs. Marchmont.

By the Judge—When I came out of the Bank of London
I said to Mrs. Marchmont, " Now I have the cheque-book
in my hand, I will prove to you that I don't spend my
money improperly."
The Judge Ordinary--That is very different to what you
stated just now.

The cross-examination then proceeded—On the 4th of
June Mrs. Marchmont called me a d—d blackguard, and
I called her an aggravating —. Two of the
servants were present. The reason I used the
expression about pulling out Mrs. Marchmont's
tongue was because she told the servants I kept another
woman. I said, " Caroline, if you use such expressions you
ought to have your tongue pulled out." Mrs. Marchmont
did not say to the servants, "for God's sake let me out of
the house." She did not run across the garden. She
walked quickly. James succeeded in stopping her. After
tha,t, Mo. Marchment kertlter bed from illness. I slept
in the same bed that night, and „applied hot wa-
ter to her stomach. She complained of a rising in
her throat. That was on the 4th of June,
18,56. I swear most positively that . she took beef-tea
and wine from my hands at the time of this
illness. I swear,it most positively. After the scene in the
garden she took tea twice during the day—all from my
hands. That I most positively swear. I swear that a re-
conciliation took place on the Saturday following this cir-
cumstance. Mrs. Marchmont's illness lasted five days.
The reconciliation took place on the night I have stated—'
five days after her illness. Monday was the first day she
asked for a doctor. This would be the 7th Juno. It was about
five o'clock in the evening. I asked her playfully if she would
have the Islington doctor. She said she would have Dr. Bird.
I said, "Yours is not a case that requires a doctor; if you
get up take a lamb chop, a little wine, and a ride in the
carriage, itwill do you more good than all the medicine in
the world. I'm afraid your illness is a pain in the temper."
I cannot give any reasons why I wished all the letters I
had written to be returned.

Re-examined by Mr. MiCaulay—l never saw the paper
relative to the settlement of 'Mrs. Marehmont's property,
which it has been said I tore up after I wrote. I don't
recollect tearing it up. I never interfered with the settle-
ment of her property or the appropriation thereof further
than has been given here in evidence. My expulsion from
the religious society I formerly belonged to did not injure
me with my congregation; I was never heard in my de-
fence. The husband of the lady brought the two letters
before my congregation, which munbered about 500. I was
present at part of the proceedings. _

By the Judge—l was not present at the conclusion of
the meeting.

By Mr. Macaulay—l was present when the votes were
given ; there were only seven hands held up for my expul-
sion. I resig,ned the appointment in consequence of this
circumstance; -but I was, without any attempt on
my part, re-elected. The whole of the circumstances
were laid before Mrs. Marchmont previous to our
marriage. She was fully aware of all the facts.
The Judge Ordinary—l don't think that circumstance
affects the case in the slightest manner, and I shall not put
the question on my notes. The question we are trying is
one of cruelty.
By Mr. Macaulay—l received several.anonymous letters
reflecting upon the conduct of Mrs. Marehmont during her
absence from home.

A short discussion here ensued whether the letters should
be produced The learned judge ruled against their pro-
duction at this point in the trial.

Re-examination by. Mr. Macaulay continued.—On Sunday
morning after our reconciliation Mrs. Marehmont said to
me, as I was dressing, " What a devil of a noise you are
making with that washhand7stand. You have kept me
awake all night by your restlessness."
Mrs. Davis, sister of Mrs, Marchmont, was called, and
Sergeant Pigott was about to put a question to her rela-
tive to the conduct of Mrs. Marchmont, but
The Judge Ordinary said, as the question • to be put was
a general one, and not, one of fact, he did not think it ought
to be submitted to the witness.

Sarah Bennett was the next witness examined. She
said—ln 1857 Mr. and Mrs. Marchmont came to myhouse at
Tonbridge-wells. They remained five weeks. Mrs. March-

mont was taken ill. During her illness Mr. Mtirchmont
always 'appeared very kind and attentive. Mrs. March •
mont seemed very irritable and bad tempered towards him.
I have sworn to tell the truth, and Ido so. Laughter.)
She appeared to be dissatisfied with him, although he tried
to do all he could for her. (Laughter.) When Mrs. March-
mont got well she did not appear to be better tempered. I
cannot recollect any.particularly angry words arising, but
I know they had words..
By Sergeant Pigott—l don't know what Mr. March-
mont said to her.

Emma Stoddart, servant at Mrs. Bennett's, said—l re-
collect a quarrel taking place wig!). Mr. and Mrs. March-
mont were there. I recollect them quarrelling about some
wine. Mrs. Marchmont became ill "after this quarrel. Mr.
Marchmont appeared very kind to her, but she always ap-
peared dissatisfied with what he did. Mrs. Marchmont told
me her husband was a brute, and she hated him. She did
not say anything about leaving him, but I thought she
meant to do so. •

Cross-examined by Sergeant Pigott—l never told Mr.
llarehmont that his wife called him a brute, but I have
another person.

Mrs. Bennett recalled—lhave heard Mrs. Marchmont call
her husband a brute. She said so to me, and she also said
she would leave him. This was after Mrs. Davis called.
By Mr. Sergeant Pigott—When she said this Mrs. March-
mont was explaining about her illness. I don't recollect
making any observation to her after she said so.
Dr, Bean, of Tonbridge Wells, said—l am a surgeon. I
was called in to see Mrs. Marchrnont when she was unwell.
Mr. Marchmont, with two exceptions, was always in the
bed-room. Mrs. Marchmont's complaint would produce
irritability of temper.

Elizabeth Hider, examined by Dr. Phillimore—l keep a
lodging-house at Dover. I recollect Mr. and Mrs. March-
mont. They came in November and remained to January
12th. On one occasion IleardiMrs. Marchmont say, "For
God's fake leave me alum",l heard her luabigul fay,

" Carry, dear, conduct yourself as a lady ; you're in the
house of a stranger." They were in the hall, and I was
on the
_kitchen stairs. Mr. Marehmont on thal occasion
wis very calm. Her manner towards him was always very
irril a 9?.

The case is not expected to be concluded before Monday
or Tuesday.

CITY SHERIFFS' COURT.
(Before Mr. Prendergast, Q.C.)

KRANTZ V. HYDE-THE LAW OF TREASURE TROVE,

This was an action to recover 10s. for a half-sovereign
lost by the plaintiff, and alleged to have been found by the
defendant.

Plaintiff deposed that during a visit to defendant's mis-
tress she lost a half-sovereign, she thought in one of the
rooms. Upon instituting inquiries it was discovered that
defendant had found a half sovereign, but he declined to
give it up unless plaintiff could swear to it. This she could
not do, but contended that it was certainly a singular
matter if two persons had lost a coin of the same
value each, and upon the same day, in the same spot.
It was very evident the money did not belong to defendant ;
she should have taken it to the police-station.
His Honour was of opinion that there could be no owner
to loose coined money found in the street. Unless the coin
were marked, who could swear to a shilling ? In the case
of a bank-note or cheque, an identity could easily be esta-
blished. Supposing 500 persons lost 500 coins on the some
day, and one coin was taken to the police-station, why the
whole 500 persons might lay claim to it. In the present
case there was no evidence to show that the half-sovereign
found by defendant belonged to" plaintiff, and the verdict
would be for defendant.

CITY POLICE COMMITTEE—(This Day.)

OMNIBUS OPPOSITION-SINGULAR JUDGMENT.

The driver of one of the Metropolitan Saloon Omnibuses
was summoned for an obstruction in the City on the 12th
inst. The number of the 'bus was 7,052, and the officer
proved that, when he told the driver to go on, there were
about 10 omnibuses behind him and nothing in front.

Although there was not, one of the 'buses behind him going
his journey, he positively refused to move unless those
behind him went on.

The Alderman (Sir It. Carden)—You must not obstruct
the carriage-way. You must pay the costs of the summons.
Officer—l have another ease againet.defendant. On the
17th inst. he and a driver of the London General Omnibus
Company's vehicles were waiting for each other in Lom-
bard-street. As they both refused to move unless one went
first, I have summoned them both.

Alderman—l shall dismiss the summons against this
driver.

Officer—And also against the driver, of the London
General Omnibus ?

Alderman—No. As he is not here I shall hear the case
in due course.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—(Thii Day.)

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

ROBBING A DOCTOR'S CARRIAGE.—WiIIiam Fenelay,
described as a carpenter, residing at Maria Cottage, Lewis-
ham, was charged with stealing a carriage apron from a
chaise in Church-passage, Soho, the property of Mr. Henry
Cooper, surgeon, of Moor-street, Soho.
John Fidoe, coachman to the prosecutor, said that last
night about 7, he put his horse in the stable in Church-
passage, and went to his tea, and on his return in about 20
minutes, he saw the prisoner coming out of the passage
with the apron under his arm. Suspecting it was his em-
ployer's property, he felt in the chaise and found the apron
was gone. He followed the prisoner, calling " Stop thief"
as he did so; and in going through Phoenix-street, the
prisoner dropped the apron, and continued his flight. Wit-
ness, determined not to lose him, still pursued him, and on
getting into Church-street the prisoner fell down, and he
(witness) then went up and secured him. The value of the
apron (produced) was about 305., and was his employer's
property. He asked hint to let him go,
_but afterwards
said it was no matter.

The prisoner said he was innocent. He was not the
same man that took it.

Brosnan, 309 A, said, hearing a cry of " Stop thief," he
went up and saw the prisoner with the coachman. On the
way to the station, the prisoner said, if he took it, it was
without his knowledge. The prisoner had been drinking.
The coachman said he was positive as to the prisoner's
identity.

The prisoner, who for some time protested his innocence,
ultimately admitted his guilt, and was committed for three
months, with hard labour—the worthy magistrate telling
him that he had very little doubt of his guilt from the first,
notwithstanding his pretended innocence.