The Sun.
London, England, 1861-12-06 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.—( This Day.)

COURT OF DIVORCE.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)
HEATH V. HEATH AND WADE.

This was a petition presented by the husband against
his wife for dissolution of marriage, on the ground of adul-
tery with the co-respondent. The petitioner was the son
of the celebrated engraver, and resided at Chester Cottage
Chalk Farm, and Mrs. Heath had formerly been a domes-
tic servant at his mother's house. The marriage; took
place, secretly, in 1855, and some time after that they both
remained at Mrs. Heath's. Three or four months after the
respondent told the petitioner she had received a letter
from the country, informing her of the dangerous illness of
her mother, and she left London for the purpose of attend-
ing on her, the husband making her an allowance to defray
the expenses of the journey. He afterwards received a letter
from her, stating that she had a miscarriage, and wished him
to send money for the payment of the debts such an occur-
rence had occasioned. From certain circumstances Mr.
Heath was induced to doubt that he had anything to do
with the pregnancy of Mrs. Heath, and he wrote several
letters to her asking for explanations, but none was given.
Mrs. Heath some time after this went:into the service of a
person named Wade, a married man with a family, and a
farmer in Suffolk. Mrs. Heath lived there till 1860, when
Mr. Wade and Mrs. Heath left the place together, and went
to Harwich, where they lived together for some time, when
Mrs. Heath was delivered of a female child, which she
registered in the name of Head, the name she and the co-
respondent had assumed during their stay in that place.
The following evidence was adduced:—

Mr. Lettice, the vestry clerk of St.:Pancras,:produced the
parish registry, in which was an entry of a marriage be-
tween Henry Chas. Heath and Mary Ann Smith on the
21st July, 1855.
John Tregard, clerk to Messrs. Howard and Dolman,
formerly solicitors to Mr. Heath, proved the handwriting
of the parties in the parish register.
The registrar of births and marriages, of Harwich, pro-
duced the book of births for the year 1860. There was an
entry of the birth of a female child on the 23d Nov., and
the signature of the informant was identified as that of the
respondent, Mrs. Heath.

Mr. Tregard said he had been in the habit of paying
money to Mrs. Heath. The first time he did so was in
Nov., 1855, and afterwards he paid her money till the year
1859. He first saw Mrs. Heath in August or Sept., 1855 ;
she used to come to the office of Messrs. Dolman. He did
not know she was then married. Mr. Heath had never
mentioned anything abont his marriage that he recol-
lected. He knew that Mr. Heath saw Mr. Dolman
in the same week that Mrs. Heath came. He
had frequently seen Mrs. Heath write, and :she had sent
letters giving directions how the money was to be sent to
her.

Mr. Rymark, the registrar of births, in Harwich, said
after the first entry of the birth of the child had been made
by a person calling her. elf Mrs. Head, she came to him and
said she had made some mistake, as her name was Heath,
not Head

John Mister, boots, at the Cups Hotel, Harwich, said in
1860 he remembered wady and gentleman coming there.
They remained there one night, and occupied the same bed-
room. They afrerwards went to live at Mr. Fenner's, and
he frequently saw them in the house, as his family lived
there. They went in the name of Mr. and Mrs. Head.
He saw the petition from this court served on the parties.
Mrs. Fenner said—ln August, 1860, the last witness
brought a lady and gentleman to lodge in her house. They
gave the name of Head. The lady remained there about
three months. The gentleman, who called himself Mr
Head, visited her about once a week-, and he told her he
was a commercial traveller. The lady was eventually con-
fined at her house, during which time the gentleman used
constantly to visit her.

Dr. Phillimore, who appeared for the respondent, said
he could not struggle against the evidence which had been
given in support of the prayer of the petition.
The jury were satisfied that the respondent had com-
mitted adultery with the co .respondent, and that the peti-
tioner lied not wilfully neglected his wife.
Mr. Macauley, Q.C., the counsel for the petitioner, said
Mr. Heath intended to allow the respondent £3O per annum
during the time she remained unmarried.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—(This Day).

MAE LBOROUGH-STREET.

EXTRAORDINARY CONDUCT OF A COACHMAN.—JIMICS
Priseman, coachman to Mr. Robert William Beckley,
warehouseman, of 218, Upper-street, Islington, was chargel
as follows :

Mr. Beckley said, on the previous night about 10, he
left, with some of his family, the Egyptian Hail, and when
in New Bond-street he found the defendant was driving
very fast. After nearly coming in contact with two or
three vehicles, the defendant drove the brougham over a
heap of earth, and into a large hole, opened for a sewer.
Finding the defendant was intoxicated, and not in a fit
state to drive, he asked him to get down and allow him to
drive home, but the defendant refused, and tried to urge
the horse over the bystanders, and would have done so,
but for the assistance of a soldier and a constable. The
defendant then got from the box and jumped inside the
brougham, and refused to leave it , and he therefore drove
him to the station. He (Mr. Beckley), under the circum •
stances, considered it a most fortunate thing that there had
been no injury to himself or others.

Mr. Tyrwhitt said be supposed the defendant would lose
his situation.

Mr. Beckley said he should certainly discharge him.
Mr. Tyrwhitt said, that being the case, he would make
the fine lower than he otherwise should have done. The
defendant would have to pay 205., or 14 days. A man
who did not know when he was well off must be taught.
He (Mr. Tyrwhitt) knew no class so well off as livery
servants, who were well treated, and had all their wants
supplied.

ROBBING A SOLICITOIL—Two females, named Ellen
Taylor and Catherine Lacy, were charged with stealing the
coat of Mr. John Fraser Walker, solicitor, of 16, Nor-
thumberland-street, Strand.
The prosecutor had been captured by one of the females
after he left the Princess's Theatre, then went to the
American Stores, and afterwards accompanied her home to
Berner's-court, a low place, and there lost his coat.
The prisoners were remanded.

THE .RESPONRIBILIfT OF THE A. 2118

RICAN OUTRAGE.

The letter of General Winfield Scott is circum-
stantially contradicted in an important point by
the Patrie, and with much apparent exactitude.
if the French paper is well informed, Capt. Wilkes
did not act without due instructions, and cannot be
disavowed :

" Various English journals, in speaking of the American
conflict, state that the San Jacinto may have acted with-
out orders, and that the act might easily be disavowed by
President Lincoln. We believe we may state, on good
authority, and the English Government is equally well in-
formed, that the San Jacinto, James Adger, Susquehannah,
Tempest, and Savannah, received identical orders from the
Cabinet at Washington, directing them to search every
vessel suspected of having the Southern envoys on board,
and to seize those personages and their despatches. It is
known to every one at Washington that the Secretary of
State for Foreign Affairs of the North had more than once
accused the Cabinet cf London of entertaining an under-
standing with the Government of the South ; and that it
was to ascertain the state of negotiations which were pre-
sumed to exist between England and President Davis that
the arrest of MM. Slidell and Mason was decided upon ; by
which measure he hoped to get hold of the important
despatches which he was most anxious to possess.
" 'I he five cruisers whose names we have given above
were placed along the line which the two envoys would
have to take. The San Jacinto, which was stationed at
the Havana, coming from the African coast, received her
instructions from the American Consul there; and it was
after a conference with that agent, who explained to him
the wishes of his Government, that the commander of the
San Jacinto went in pursuit of the Trent, whose nationality
was perfectly known to him. The commander of the San
Jacinto, while capturing the envoys, forgot the despatches
so anxiously wanted at Washington."