The Sun.
London, England, 1859-12-21 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE—Dec. 20.

-0. ____

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE
(Before Sir C. Cresswell.)
ANTHONY T. ANTHONY.
This was a petition by Eleanor Sophia Anthony,
praying for a judicial separation from her husband,
Mark Anthony, on the ground of cruelty. The
respondent denied the charge.
De..Spinles wad Mr. D. Keane appeared for the
petitioner •, Dr. Deane, Q.C., and Dr. Swabey for
the respondent.
The partiee were married at Surbiton on the 18th
of April, 1846. They cohabited in various parts of
London until 1856, and have had three daughters,
Pheebe, Constance, and Grace, born respectively in
1849, 1851, and 1853. Mr. Anthony is an artist
by profession.
Mrs. Anthony, in her examination, stated that her
maiden name was Marshall. In 1853 she and her hus-
band were living at Bayswater. Just before her
last child was born she repeatedly asked him for
money to buy clothes, but he would not give her
any. She obtained £2 after her confinement from
Mrs. Lucy, a friend of hers, to whose husband Mr.
Anthony had lent £lO. When Mr. Anthony was
informed of it he was very angry, and ordered his
bedroom to be locked against her. After that con-
finement he never returned to her room, but slept
with her occasionally. They had a servant named
Emma Bennett, and about this time she discovered
her sitting on Mr. Anthony's' knees. She imme-
diately told her to leave the house. Bennett said
she would not go unless her master discharged her.
Mr. Anthony said, " She will get no discharge
from me." One day in May, 1853, Mr. Anthony
had been out sketching, and came home to tea. He
told Bennett to make tea for him. She said Ben-
nett should never take her place at the tea-table
while she was in the house. Mr. Anthony then
struck her over and over again on the head with
such violence that all her combs were broken, and
her temples were much bruised, and pushed her
violently out of the room. She fell on the mat,
where she lay until Mrs. Dann came downstairs and
helped her up. Mr. Anthony occupied a bedroom
next to that of Bennett, and her room we's on the
floor below. She was frequently disturbed by
noises overhead, ,and one night she went upstairs,
and saw Mr. Anthony coming out of Bennett's
room in his nightshirt.
The Judge Ordinary doubted whether this evi-
dence was admissible, as it tended to show that the
husband had been guilty of adultery.
Dr. Spinks submitted that the statute did not
exclude the evidence of a husband or wife as to
adultery, except in suits instituted in consequence
of adultery. This suit was instituted in conse-
quence not of adultery but of cruelty.
The judge OrdinaryT-You are quite right. It
is rather a curious state of things, but so the law
stands.

Mrs. Anthony continued—When she accused
her husband of having committed adultery with
Bennett, he told her to mind her children.
She frequently requested him to send Bennett
away, but he would not. In April, 1854, Bennett's
sister came to live in the house. In the following
July she remarked to Mr. Anthony that this sister
was not a respectable girl, upon which he threw a
jug of hot coffee in her face. On another occasion,
when she was reproaching him with believing Ben-
nett rather than her, he threw a jug of cold water
over her. He also struck her a dreadful blow on the
head. One of her fingers was accidentally cut to the
tendon, and he would not allow it to be dressed for
five hours. In June, 1855, she received a letter from
her mother which annoyed him, and he called her
vile names and pushed her oat of the room with a
chair. In July, 1855, she went on a visit to her
father-in-law at Washford, and Mr. Anthony told
her when she was starting that she had lest her
home, and he intended to make Emma Bennett
" lord over many things." She was absent five weeks,
and when she returned he made a great piece of
work because she had spent 15s. that she had taken
with her in washing for herself and the children.
About the same time he told Bennett in her pre-
sence that she had accused Bennett of stealing cur-
rants, that she was a very bad wife, and Bennett
must watch her, and that Bennett might say what
she liked 'of her. Bennett was very insolent to her.
He then threw her out of the room and kicked her.
When her father-in-law died in October, 1855, Mr.
Anthony provided similar mourning dresses for her
and the children and the servants. He refused to
allow her a bit of velvet in addition. He told her he
wished she woulergo away, and offered to allow her
£5O a-year. When she asked how she was to live
he said he saw no necessity for her living at all,
but if she must live she might prostitute herself.
Bennett always had charge of the keys of the house.
She once accused Bennett of trying to put some-
thing in her beer, upon which Bennett endeavoured
to lock her in the coal teller, and sent for a police-
man, but he refused to interfere. Mr. Anthony was
then out, and when he returned he told her it would
have done her good to be incarcerated. He then
wrote Bennett a check for her -wages. Bennett,
by her husband's directions, allowed her half a
pint of porter for dinner, and half a pint for
supper. and she had to take it in herself. In
1855 Mr. Anthony went to Paris, and before
going told the servants not to wait on her
if she d:d anything disagreeable to them. They
never did wait on her, arld ovhcu he came back he
said it served her right. She told him he was driv-
ing her out of her senses by his 'cruelty, and he said
he did not think she had brains enough to go mad.
In January, 1856, he beat her with his maulstick
for asking him to discharge Bennett. She was so
reduced that she at last made up her mind to leave
the house, and on the 6th Oct. 1856, she went away
with the two youngest children. She went first to
a sister of Mr. Anthony's,' at Kentish-town, and
then took lodgings. [A letter she had received
from Mr. Anthony was read, in which he affec-,
tionately asked her to return, and said that Emma
should leave if she interfered with her or treated
her with disrespect ; hut he looked on Emma in
the meantime as " a valuable servant, probably
placed by circumstances in a false position which
she did not properly understand.' To this Mrs.
Anthony replied that she should not return until
Emma had left the house, and in a long letter re-
capitulated her various causes of complaint against
Emma and Mr. Anthony. She wrote another letter
a few days afterwards repeating her reproaches,
and saying she should not return. He replied
shortly that he was much shocked at the step she
had taken, and again urged her to come home.] Oa
the 19th November in the same year Mr. Anthony
visited her, and asked her to go home. She inquired
whether the woman had left the house. He said
" No," and she said she would never return while
Bennett was under his roof. He then Carried, off
the second child Constance. The two elder chil-
dren had since been brought to see her by Bennett.
The youngest remained in her custody. Mrs.
Anthony added that she had frequently stood for a
model to her husband with the greatest willingness,
and on one occasion he had beaten her naked flesh
with a furze bush.

Cross-examined—She was 37 yeqrs of age at the
time of the marriage, and he was 28. She had
known him for, three years before -that time:
w Dr. Deane as crossexarninino• her about a per-
son named Richards, to whom she had paid visits
before her marriage, when—
Dr. Spinks objected to questions relating to what
had happened before the marriage. •
Dr, Deane submitted that they were relevant, as
they tended to show that the petitioner was not a
fit person to have the custody of one of the children,
for which she prayed.
His Lordship held that the-evidence was inad-
missible, as the question of the custody of the chil-
dren was distinct from that of cruelty.
Mrs. Anthony was then cross-examined at con-
siderable length, and admitted that she had a sister,
Mrs-Winston, to whom her husband took a great
dislike, and with whom she used to correspond,
through Bennett, unknown to her husband, and.
receive into the hoase when he was absent. Mrs.
.Winston did not live with her husband ; he was
too great a brute. She denied that she had ever
sent or taken provisions or wine to Mrs. Winston
or her mother except on one occasion. Then she
sent a veal pie and a bottle of porter, because her
sister was ill in bed with a broken leg. She had
trecused the servants of taking wine and other
things, for she believed they had done so. Mr.
Anthony never accused her of pawning her clothes.
Re could never have made such an accusation un-
less ho liad dreamt it. She denied that she ever
took the poker to her husband, or that she broke a
quantity of croe'ke'ry when he threw the water over
her, but she did break a china jug.
• The quarrel
began with a dispute about some towels. She had
had an allowance of £BO a-yearfw
hic,erher
since t the separa-
tion. She had heard that after departureshe
h had
H oniton lace veil- and other articles
accused the servants of stealing were fband between
place a
her -' mattress and her bed, but she did not lace
them there. When she left her husband was in a
very bad state of health. When ho took away
Constance there was a great disturbance, the child
was dragged between them and screamed, and the
landlady of the house sent for a policeman, to
whom Mr. Anthony said she had robbed him ; bat
the policeman, finding that she was his wife, refused
to take her in charge.
Dr. Norton proved that in August, 1855, he was
called in to see Mrs. Anthony, antiiaund her, in a
. .•
state of great excitement, arising, as she said, fromthe ill-usage of the servants, acting under Mr.
Anthony's direction: In that month, during Mr.
Anthony's absence in the country, she ran away
from' her house one evening. Bennett came and told
him, and he went out, and about half-past 11 found
her in Westbourne-grove, so excited that she hardly
knew what she was about, She said she intended

to throw herself into the canal. He prescribed se- '
dative medicines, and a nourishing diet. In the fol-
lowing November Mr. Anthony called and asked
by what authority he had attended Mrs. Anthony,
after a letter he had lately received. -He said he
thought it was his duty as a professional man to
attend an opprested woman, as he considered. Mrs.
Anthony to be, whenever he was called upon. Mr.
Anthony made some strong remark about horse-
whipping, at which he smiled. He did not attend
Mrs. Anthony after November, 1855.
In cross-examination, Dr. Norton denied that
Mrs. Anthony's excitement, on any occasion when
he attended her arose from drunkenness. The ser-
vants did not behave improperly to her in his pre-
sence. _

Mrs. Jane Dann, a needlewoman, who had worked
for the Anthonys since 1850, described Mr. An-
thony's conduct to his wife as much worse than that
of any other husband she had ever known, and cor-
roborated Mrs. Anthony's evidence in various par-
ticulars. As to Mrs. Anthony, she said she never
in her life met with a lady of " such refined taste,
and who was such a Christian woman." A few
months after the birth of the last child Mr. An-
thony forbade her to cro to the house.
Mrs. Jones, the landlady of a house at Kentish-
town, in which Mrs. Anthony was lodging when
the child Constance was taken away, described
what passed on that occasion, confirming Mrs.
Anthony's statement. Mrs. Anthony was in a very
bad state of health.
James Price, the policeman who was called in on
the same occasion, was also examined.
Dr. Deane having opened the respondent's case,
called

Emma Bennett, who said-1 now live in Mr. An-
thOny's service. I first went there in the autumn
Of 1851, when I was 21 years of age. Mr. and Mrs.
Anthony were generally very comfortable then.
Mrs. Anthony's conduct changed about 1853. Her
language then became very violent and obscene.
She once threatened to stab Mr. Anthony in 1854,
and she had a carving knife in her hand. I have
seen her throw a knife at him across the supper
table. In 1854 Mrs. Winston came to the house.
When I first entered the service Mr. Anthony gave
me orders never to admit Mrs. Winston. On many
occasions in 1852, 1853, and 1854 I took provisions
and wine out of the house by my mistress's orders
to her mother's house and to Mrs. Winston's. She
lived at a baby-linen warehouse opposite the Marble
Arch, and went by the name of Mrs. Brown. I have
taken notes to her from Mrs. Anthony, directed to
Mrs. Gordon. She went by that name in 1854. I
received letters from Mrs. 'Winston on many occa-
sions. 'They were for my mistress, but were ad-
dressed to me. When Mr. Anthony was away Mrs.
Winston almost made the house her, home—dining,
taking tea, and supping there. She and Mrs. An-
thony drank wine at dinner and stout at supper.
Mr. Anthony only drank wine on Sundays. Mr.
Francis came late one night when Mrs. Winston
was supping there, and my mistress said " Perhaps
it, is your master,. don't open." When I did open the
door Mrs. Winston was hidden in a closet. In the
early part of 1854 1 was questioned About some wine
that was missing. Mrs. Anthony accused Lucy and
me of takingeit. I denied the charge. I never had
taken wine. I had seen Mrs. Anthony go out of the
house with bottles in May, 1854 or 1855. I told Mr.
Anthony- that when the charge was made. I never
.had the key of the cellar, but I had the key of the
store closet given me about August 1855. Mrs.
Anthony also accused me of taking currants. She
was a very extravagant housekeeper. At other times
she accused me ofstealing a Honiten lace veil, a pair
of gloves, a penknife, and 2s. On one occasion,
when Mr. Anthony was sleeping upstairs in the
room next mine, Mrs. Anthony came up to my bed-
room and accused me of having master there. He was
never in my room. I never sat on Mr. Anthony's knee,
but she accused me of having done it. The quarrel
about the tea began by her refusal to make it.
Mr. Anthony ordered me to make tea, and she
dared me to do it, and pushed me out of the room.
When Mr. Anthony threw the jug of water over
her it was in self-defence, she having thrown the
butter dish and breadbasket at him. Her finger
was cut in the struggle, and Mr. Anthony patched
it up. In 1854 and 1855 Mrs. Anthony's health
was not very good. Dr. Norton told me she was
not to go out alone. She did go out alone.
She had everything becoming her station in the
way of dress. She was very slovenly. When Mr.
Anthony's father died I bought the mourning for
all the family, and she had a mantle and black
bonnet different from ours. She always seemed to
have plenty of money. Mr. Anthony was always
kind to her. When Mrs. Anthony went away he
had been absent from home for about a month.
Cross-examined—Mr. Anthony was always kind
to me. In 1854 I had a sister called Betsey, whom
I frequently visited. I did not tell her that I and
Mr. Anthony had " broken the cold ice." My sister
Ellen never wrote to congratulate me upon it. She
did write me a letter congratulating me upon
" having broken the cold ice" not with " Mr. A.",
but with " H." I have the investigation of
both Mr. and Mrs. Anthony into that matter, and
their signatures, that they were quite satisfied: He
never told me not to mind Mrs. Anthony. I once
shut her in the kitchen because she accused me-of
poisoning her beer, and I sent for a policeman to
her. I never threatened her or used violence towards
I never heard her insist upon my being sent
from the house. I have said I would not leave so
long as I suited master.
Re-examined—'When sent for the policeman I
told her to give me in charge if I had poisoned her
beer. Dr. Norton also came, and said she must
have been drinking.
To his Lordship—l never heard of her having
any-combs broken or of having her temple bruised.
Efeza Baylis, who had lived in service with the
Anthonys in 1853, 1854, and 1855 as nurse, corro-
borated the last witness. She was called Lucy in
the house.
Mrs. 'Anthony, sen., the mother of the respon-
dent, said, that he was kind to his wife as far as she
con ldjedge. After the separation she came to Lon-
don to' try and reconcile them. His wife said the
cause of her, departure was jealousy of Bennett. Mr.
Anthony promised to get rid of Bennett, but she
still refused to return. She appeared fond ofswine,
and would probably have taken more than was
good for her if she had been allowed.
Mark Anthony—l am a painter. I was introduced
to my wife by Mr. Kendrick. In 1853 I forbade my
wife to have any intercourse with Mrs. Winston.
I afterwards learnt that she had communicated
with her. I discovered one day at dinner that
some particular sherry that I was very fond of
was all gone, and I spoke to my with about
it. • She said she did not know what had become
of the wine. The servants were called up. They
denied that they had taken it, but said their mis-
tress took wine regularly when I was away, and
moreover sent it and took it out of the house to her
mother and to Mrs. Winston. She said she could
not account for its disappearance, but supposed the
girls must have false keys to the cellars. I inves-
tigated the matter, and had no alternative but to
believe that•she had taken it. I then took pos-
session of the key of the cellar. There were other
discussions about tea and currants, and various
things that were missing. She accused Bennett of
stealing them. I learnt on looking into the trades-
men's books that more things were charged for than
we could have consumed. The result was that I took
charge of the household expenses, and they decreased
by about one-half. On my returning one day
from sketching I had some angry words with my
wife about some money she had obtained from Mrs.
Lucy. She said she would not make tea for me,
and threw the keys at me. I touched the bell
for Bennett, and desired her to make it. She got
up and ejected Bennett from the room. In trying
to prevent her I am sorry to say I boxed her cars
with my open hand. I regret having done so, but
the blow was not a violent one. On another occa-
sion we had a quarrel about a towel, in the course
of which I threw a jug of cold water over her, and
she broke a bread-basket, a butter-dish, and a very
nice jug, for which I had given £5, and I am
ashamed to say I struck her with my fist. On
another occasion, being greatly irritated by her, I
threw the coffee grounds in my cup upon her.
With those exceptions I never struck her or was
guilty of any violence whatever towards her, nor
did I use threats or irritating language. She shared
my money with me, and had plenty of clothes and
a few jewels or trinkets. There was plenty and I
to spare of food. The children were well taken
care of when Lucy had charge of them. When my
wife's finger was cut I attended to it. From Janu-
ary to October, 1853, we were living on excel-
lent terms; whenever a difference arose I
requested her to leave the room, or else left it my-
self. After she separated from me I urged her to
return, and promised on my honour to send away
Bennett, but she refused. She had been very jea-
lous of Bennett. It is not true that she ever saw
me, comin-, from Bennett'; bedroom. We had
separateeou r health,seandnbledwsrs in
bedrooms in 1851 in consequence of my
consequence discontinued o
allf nathitertitienro al
receivedin inter-
course in
her tiother, and of.thc revolting language she
thee usednfer
b ese and tine
tome. She hasee
egreencsitv
child sinceedB2a yearespfela:ol.e.ar:
ilt
tion. The child. was to remain with'her untils
years of age, which it will be next February.
Cross-examined—Bennett had: " meddled, with".
Mrs. Anthony's letters by my orders. She has
complained, but not again and again, of my sub-
jecting her to Bennett. I did not think that either
my property or my honour was safe with her, and
therefore I told •Bennett to send me her letters. I
refused to discharge Bennett. I was so pained
when I struck her with my fist that I never struck
her afterwards, Two or three years ago she coin-

icr.

menced a suit against me in the Ecclesiastical
Ccrurt zrt.

To his Lordship--She came upstairs one night,
and went to retmett's room. She did not find me
in the passage. —I was not in my bedroom, but in
my dressing-room. It was 12 or 1 o'clock. I had
been in bed. My room and dressing-room were in
darkness. I had just got into my dressing-room
when she came up.
Dr. Deane summed up ; Dr. Spinks replied, and
His Lordship took time to consider his decision.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENaR.

MIDLAND CIRCUIT—WARWICK, rec. 20.

John Kington, aged 22, was indicted for the wil-
ful murder of Elizabeth Ann Kington, his wife, at
Coventry, ou the 12th of November last.
Mr. Spooner and Mr. Adams appeared for the
prosecution.
The prisoner pleaded
The learned Judge said that he trusted that the
prisoner had not adopted such a course under any
hope or persuasion that it would be better for him
in this world if he did so.

The prisoner in a low voice said that it was of no
use, and that he could not plead against his con-
science.

A plea of guilty having been recorded on the
coronet's inquisition, the prisoner handed in a writ-
ten paper, the perusal of which occupied the learned
judge for some minutes. On concluding it his lord-
ship said he trusted that the prisoner did not wish
the contents of the paper to be read publicly.
The prisoner persisted in his resolution of having
it read in public, and expressed a wish that the
clergyman who had acted as his spiritual adviser
should be called.

The Rev. Mr. Widdrington, vicar of St. Michael's,
was then sworn, and stated that the prisoner had
acted under his advice in pleading guilty, and that
otherwise his spiritual ministrations would have
been unavailing to the prisoner. He had made in-
quiries respecting the case, and had examined the
evidence given before the magistrates and the coro-
ner, and he could come to no other conclusion than
that the proofs were overwhelming, and that the
prisoner had committed an atrocious murder. He
had assisted in drawing up the written statement,
in conformity with the wishes of the prisoner, and
for the purpose of its being handed to the judge.
The learned Judge said that the rev. gentleman
seemed to have mistaken the effect of the plea of
not guilty, which was only to put the prosecution
upon proof of the crime.
Mr.lViddrington replied that the prisoner had sug-
gested to him that he did not wish the last act of
his life to be the pleading a false plea. He assented
to a suggestion from the learned judge that the
paper had been drawn up under his advice.
.The learmad Judge then said—l have read it
through. It appears to me that it is not advisable
that it should bc.) read in public. You know to what
I

Mr. Widdrington at once admitted the force of
the observation, and, after some little persuasion,
the prisoner was induced to forego the reading of
the paper.
The learned Judge then put on the black cap, and
said—Prisoner at the bar; you have been found
guilty on your confession of the murder of your
wife. I have read through the depositions of the
witnesses before the coroner and the committing
magistrates, and having done so, and finding their
evidence conclusive, itAs not a matter of surprise or
regret to me that you have thought it better to
plead guilty, not in hopes of obtaining mercy in
this world, but from a consciousness that the evi-
dence was overwhelming, and in order to avoid the
pain of hearing the details of your crime proved by
the witnesses in face of the public. You have
handed in a paper, which I have read, and which. I
will take care shall be forwarded to the proper
quarter. But lam bound to say that there is no-
thing in it to justify you in hoping that mercy will
be extended to you. I have prayed you not to have
that paper read in public. It contains imputations
on others of the most dreadful kind, and I should
regret that the last act of your life should have been
to impute to others such a dreadful crime as that
which you have suggested. I have no wish to in-
crease your pain, but it is my duty to pass upon
you the sentence of the law, and I can hold out to
you no hope of mercy in this world The learned
judge then proceeded to pass sentence of death in
the usual form.

Mr. Widdrington said that he was satisfied that
a proper course had been taken ia respect to the
reading of the statement, and that he was anxious
that it shculd be understood that he was convinced
of the innocence of the party implicated by it.
The circumstances of the case were of a shocking
description. The prisoner is said to have been sub-
ject to fits. His marriage had been an unhappy
one. He had ill-treated his wife, and appears, to
have nourished suspicions as to her conduct. On
the day in question they were living apart, but he
met her in tue streets of Coventry., took her to
_a
field on the foot road from Coventry to Stoke,
knocked her down and cut her throat, severing the
carotid artery, the windpipe, and, indeed, all the
arteries leading to the spine.
The business of the assizes terminated shortly
after three o'clock this afternoon.