The Sun.
London, England, 1859-12-23 00:00:00

SOPWITII Y. SOP TIM.

This was the petition of Matilda Sopwith, praying for a
jadicial separation from her husband, Henry Lindsell
Sopwith, a surgeon, practising at Tonbridge Wells. An
answer had been filed, in which the respondent denied the
adultery alleged to have been committed with the person
mentioned in the petition.

From the evidence it appeared that Mrs. Sopwith was a
young lady, and the only daughter of a gentleman of for-
tune named Dean. Mr. Sopwith was a widower, and had a
grown- up daughter. The petitioner was married at the parish
church of Marylebone, in June, 1857, and after the mar-
riage they went to Hythe, and frees thence to Tonbridge
Wells. Some circumstances had aroused the suspicion of
Mrs. Sopwith very shortly after her marriage, and sho
began to doubt the fidelity of her husband. His conduct
towards her became much altered, as it was said he used
to stop out late at night, not on professional duty, and act to-
wards his wife with great coldness. In May, 1858, Mrs. So-
pwith's family visited her at Tonbridge Wells, and'ivere dis-
tressed to find that an; unhappy state of affairs existed, and
ono of them mentioned the subject to Mr. Sopwith, when he
replied that he did not love her as he used to do. Some time
after Mrs. Sopwith went to Cheltenham. After this :Mr.
Sopwith wrote to his wife at Cheltenham, stating that on
her return she was not to visit or receive visits from
her parents. She refused to accede to such a
proposal, and quitted her husband's house, and
communicated to them all that had transpired,
and they instituted an inquiry, which led to the discovery
of the alleged improper conduct of Mr. Sopwith with a
Mary Ann Prickett.
Mr. Dean, the father, in his evidence, admitted that he
had employed the aid of ex-policemen to get up evidence
in the case.

James Burk said he bad been in tho employ of Mr. Sop-
with, as groom, previous to his marriage with Miss Dean.
Before the wedding his master appeared to be very fond of
Miss Prickett. He (witness) had seen him kiss her before
his marriage. After that she used to visit him. She used
to go into the registry-office in Mr. Sopwith's house and
remain with him some time. Witness had been tempted to
look through the keyhole, and he had seen Miss Prickett
sitting on the doctor's knee, and ho seemed to be
taking indecent liberties with her. He had also seen Miss
Prickett go into his master's house as late as half-past 11
at night. He had watched outside'until 12 o'clock to see if
she came out again, but she did not.
The witness was submitted to a severe cross-examination
by Mr. Macready, on the part of Mr. Sopwith, with a view
to show that many of the circumstances he had mentioned
had been remembered after he had been drinking with the
persons employed to get up evidence in the case.
[The case was proceeding when we went to press.]

SHERIFFS' COURT.
(Before Mr. Kerr.)
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF THE DANUTIE.-1 THREAT
TO SUE LORD JOHN RUSSELL.-GUNTIIORPB V. WRIGHT.
This was an action to recover £5 108., being eleven days
at 10s. per day, charged, as stated by plaintiff's counsel,
as under :
Mr. Langford, instructed by Mr. Medina, said that
plaintiff had been engaged by the agent of the commission
to go to the mouth of the Danube for two years. As soon
as the work was finished plaintiff was to be brought home,
but ho was detained at the mouth of the Danube for eleven
days, though two boats came up. Under those circum-
stances plaintiff sought to recover damages.
The contract was handed up to the Judge, who asked
how defendant could be made liable.
Mr. Langford—He is the responsible agent to the com-
mission, and the contract was made in London.
His Honour inquired as to how the commission was
formed.

Mr. Needham (for defendant)—Of the seven great states
of Europe.
His Honour—Who is the commissioner in England ?
Mr. Necdham—Lord John Russell.
His Honour—Then you had better sue Lord John. ,
(Laughter.) If Lord John is the responsible commissioner
in England there will be no difficulty.
Mr. Langford suggested that Wright should bo asked
who was the commissioner.
Defendant said that Major Stokes, of the Royal Engi-
neers, was the English commissioner.
His Honour—Whew is he ?
Defendant—At Galatz.
His Honour—Then you had better take out a suit in the
superior court and send it out.
Defendant—l am not the agent in London. I merely
witnessed the contract which was signed by plaintiff and
Mr. Visit.
His Honour (looking at the contract)--Visit is respon-
sible.
Wright—l was only the witness. I act as occasional
agent to the commission when they instruct me. I have
funds when they hand me any. I have no money now.
His Honour—You see Wright has disclosed the principal.
Mr. Langford—Now place my case upon Smith's
" Mercantile Law," page 170, where it is laid down that
where an agent in England acts for a foreign principal,
although ho may disclose his principal, he is still liable.
His Honour—The agent here is Visit.
Mr. Langford—Now I wish to ask defendant if Lord
John Russell is one of the Commissioners ?
Defendant—He is the English Foreign Minister. The
same as M. Persigny, or—
His Honour—lt does not matter.
. Mr. Needham—The States composing the Commission
are England, France, Sardinia, Russia, Turkey, Austria,
and Prussia. I only said Lord John Russell was a Com-
missioner because it was suggested to me at the moment.
His Honour—The contract is "approved by J. Stokes,
Royal Engineers." Plaintiff must be nonsuited in this
case, with costs.
Mr. Needham--I have a good defence on the merits.
Mr. Langford—Never mind the merits. The point of
law is quite sufficient.