The Sun.
London, England, 1861-11-07 00:00:00

ROLLS COURT.
(Before Sir J. Romilly, Master of the Rolls.)
DAVESIES DE PONTES V. KENDAL.--FORD V. DAVESIES DE

PONTES.-JUDGMENT.

His Honour the Master of the Rolls, in delivering judg-
ment, said—The points which 1 have to decide in this case
are very simple and very short; but the facts which raise
these points, and which it will probably be necessary to
state how they arose, constitute a case of the most singular
and romantic character, as not likely to be found in any
case of fiction. The points which I have to decide are,
whether the execution of a power contained in a will,
bearing date April 12, 1854, was or was not effectual;
o whether the revocation of it by two deeds—one
Aug. 24, 1854, and the other Sept. 29, 1854, was an effectual
revocation of it; and whether these deeds were inoperative
tr-d of non-effect. Now, I think it is essential to state an
outline of the facts which relate to this question, and which
are inseparable from the question, because the intentions of
the parties, and the acts of the parties go far to support the
validity of the deeds. It is admitted that the validity of
the deeds depend on the intentions of the parties. It ap-
peared that the lady, at the age of 16, formed an attach-
ment with a French young gentleman, and in the year
1823 both of them vowed an everlasting attachment,
and engaged to be married. She left Paris and came
came over to this country, and her friends persuaded her
that this was an idle attachment which she bad formed in
Paris. In 1823 she married Mr. Dolphin, and in 1829, by
way of family arrangement, he executed three deeds, in one
of which he gave her the free income of the residue of his
real and personal estate in England. She afterwards sepa-
rated from her husband, and lived a solitary life till 1853.
She then returned to Paris and resumed her intimacy with
the French gentleman which she had formed 30 years pre-
viously. She found that he was in a position of high rank
—a general in the army. She wrote to him, and let him
understand, by the tenor of her correspondence, that
she wished a renewal of his friendship, and re-
ferred him to their former attachment. He was
then a bachelor. An interview took place in the
west of France. She raised £3OO on her husband's property,
and did not conceal her desire to get quit of her husband
and be the wife of the general. She was advised by a noble
lord there to proceed to Scotland, and get her husband to
reside there 40 days with a lady friend, and obtain a divorce
against him in the Scotch court. He proceeded to Scotland
with his paramour, and an action of divorce was instituted
against him; and, in order to establish her pleas, a consi-
derable sum of money was paid down, and £3OO a year pro-
mised was the effect of this arrangement. Her husband
was then in reduced circumstances. She had difficulty in
taking the oath dt calumnia, that she did not directly or
indirectly, by herself or friends, combine'or conspire to get
up this action, but the oath was taken and the divorce
obtained. She then went to France and married the gene-
ral, and executed a will in' his favour, giving him all her
real and personal property. She afterwards executed a deed
sole in favour of her trustees. The general was informed
by his solicitor that the divorce in Scotland would not be
acknowledged in England, and, as he was not legally mar-
-1 ried, he had no claim on her first husband's property.
His Honour dismissed the first cause without costs, and
all -,wed Mr. Ford his costs in the second suit. His Honour
said the lady had deserted the general and died in a con-
vent in France.

SIR DAVID BREWSTER ON THE
DARWIN THEORY.

On Monday afternoon the winter session of the
University of Edinburgh was publicly opened by
the delivery of an introductory address by Principal
Sir David Brewster, in the General Assembly Hall.
The hall was crowded in every part, and the Prin-
cipal was received with applause as he entered the
hall. In the course of his address he referred to
Mr. Darwin's theory. Mr. Darwin, he said, has
appealed to facts and principles in support of his
theory, and, therefore, we must appeal to facts and
principles for its refutation. He maintains :-1.
That variations in species actually arise in the course
of descent from a common progenitor. 2. That
many of these variations are an improvement on
the original stock. 3. That, by a continual natural
selection, from among these improved specimens,
occasioned by a strup:le for life, the most vigorous
individuals become the progenitors of the next
generation. 4. That there is a power in nature
everywhere affecting this selection. Naturalists of
high authority have followed Mr. Darwin through
all his arguments, and have shown in the clearest
manner that his theory is inconsistent with the
very facts upon which he has rested it. It is out
of my sphere, and yours also, to discuss this ques-
tion as one of natural history; but even in this
aspect of it, we may allow that species do admit of
great variations, and may, by new methods of
feeding and culture, rise to a higher scale, and yet
deny that there is any evidence even of one species
of the same genus having passed into another, and
still less that the fish have passed into fowl, or birds
into beasts, or quadrupeds into man. We have
absolute proof, indeed, of this immutability of
species, whether we search for it in historic or geo-
logical times. The cat and dog embalmed in Egypt
four thousand Years ago are the same as the cat and
dog of the present day ; and in the fossil remains
of the pre-Adamite ages there is not the slightest
proof of any variations in the successive inhabi-
tants of the earth. Mr. Darwin himself admits,
to use his own words, " that this is the most obvious
and grave objection to his theory ;" but yet he con-
jectures that rocks still undiscovered, and myriads
of years older than the Cambrian or azoic strata,
may still bear testimony to his views. When such
strata with such indications are discovered, when
the instinct lof the elephant shall have expanded
into reason, and the chatter of the parrot have its
climax in speech,
the brutes that perish.
we may then claim kindred with