The Sun.
London, England, 1866-07-07 00:00:00

LAW INT.

COURT OF DIVORCE.
(Bejore Sir J. P. Wilde and a Common Jury.)
GERRARD T. GERRARD AND BLUNDREL.

Mr. Browne and Mr. Searle appeared for the petitioner,
Mr. Inderwick for the respondent, and Dr. Spinks for the
co-respOndent. _ _

The petitioner is a schoolmaster in Staffordshire, and
petitioned the court for a dissolution of marriage with his
wife on the ground of her adultery with the co-respondent,
who is a beerhouso keeper. The respondent denied the
adultery, and the co-respondent, in additional to denial,
further pleaded cruelty on the part of the petitioner. The
petitioner and respondent were married in the middle of
1861, but separated in the beginning of 1865. The adultery
charged was alleged on the 31st of May in the latter year,
at the house of a butcher named Johnson, who lived some
distance from Henley. _

Mary Roberts, a married woman and daughter of John-
son, deposed that she was staying at her father's on the
31st of May, 1865, and about 7 o'clock in the morning she
saw Mrs. Gerrard and Mr. Blundrel sitting together on the
sofa in the drawing-room, and later in the day she saw
them in a bed room together.

In the course of cross-examination by Dr. Spinks it was
elicited that they had all been drinking freely together
during the day.

Rebecca Johnson gave some corroborative evidence, and
said that the respondent told her several times that her
husband was very kind to her, but sho had no opportuni-
ties of judging of the terms on which they lived, as she
did not visit at their house. Mrs. Gerrard had complained
that she was short of money at the end of May, 1865. When
respondent and co-respondent came to her house on the
morning in question they were both the worse for drink,
and she had heard that they had been out all night drink-
ing together.

_
Rebecca Johnson, a barmaid at the Roebuck public-
house at Fosbroke, where the co-respondent resided, proved
that one day in May, 1865, ho came to the house accom-
panied by the respondent, and they remained in the bar
parlour for about an hour. She served them with brandy
and water, and now she recollected that it was the 31st of
May, because it was two days after Maypole-day.
Some other witnesses wore also called for the petitioner's

case.
The jury found a verdict for the defendants.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.---This Day.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

RESISTING THE POLICE AT HER MAJESTYS THEATRE.

Sergeant M'Huge, 4 A, said he was on duty at her
Majesty's Theatre yesterday evening about six o'clock,
there being a large attendance, and in consequence a large
number of servants present. To prevent confusion a place
was set apart at the theatre, by the Commissioner
of Police, for servants to wait in, but the defendant
refused to go there, and stood at the door. He
told the defendant that if he did not obey the
regulations he should have to remove him, but he still re-
fused, and on attempting to remove him he resisted a
good deal, and caused all the servants to come out, and in
consequence created great disorder. Ho then took the
defendant into custody. . _ _

In answer to Mr. Knox, the sergeant said the defendan
had been drinking. .

Police-constable, 559 A, corroborated the sergeant.
The defendant said he was treated very roughly by the
sergeant, thrown down, and his clothes were torn.
The sergeant denied this, stating that the defendant's
clothes were torn through his resisting being taken into
custody.
Mr. Knox said he did not believe the defendant, and he
should fine him 10s. or 7 days.