The Sun.
London, England, 1861-06-11 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, JUNE 11, :1861:

LA Tr INTELLIGENCE—(2MB Day).

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

(Before the Lord Chief Baron, and Barons Martin and
Bramwell.)
THE CASE OF MR. BATCH.

Mr. M. Chambers, Q.C.. on the judges taking their seats
this morning, mentioned the case of Hatch v. Lewis, and
asked his lordship whether he had decided upon the course
he intended to take with respect to the costs in the action.
His lordship said he had consulted with the other judges,
and he found two were in favour of granting a certificate
to enable Mr. Hatch to receive his costs, and two were of
the opposite opinion. It would therefore be necessary for
the learned counsel to move for a rule of court calling upon
the defendants to show cause why they should not pay the
costs in the cause.

Mr. Chambers then formally moved for the rule under
the 15 and 16 of Victoria, chap. 54, sec. 4, and cited cases
in support of his argument.
The court granted the application, and the learned coun-
sel drew up the rule in the following terms :--
Rule to show cause why plaintiff should not receive his
costs pursuant to the statute of 15 and 16 Victoria, chap.
54, on the ground that there was sufficient reason for
bringing the action into that court. The rule to be drawn
up on reading affidavit, with liberty for both Bides to refer
to the judges and short-hand writers' notes.
Mr. Chambers proposed that the rule should be made
returnable to-morrow.

The Court said there was some difficulty about that, as
it was necessary the other parties should have time to con-
sider their arguments.
Mr. Chambers was anxious that the question should be
disposed of to-morrow, because if it was not it would
have to stand over till Michaelmas. He would have the
rule drawn up, and served on Mr. Lewis within an hour of
the present time.
The Lord Chief Baron—You can take ;your rule and
draw it up for to-morrow, but if Mr. Sergeant Shee (who
was not then present) complained that he had not had time
to consider his case, he could not refuse any application he
might make.

Mr. Sergeant Shee here entered the court, and on being
informed by Mr. Lewis of the matter before their lordships,
the learned sergeant said he should most certainly not be in
a position to proceed to-morrow. He did not see there was
any reason for pressing the case on.
Mr. Chambers—There is a necessity, because Mr. Hatch
is at this moment in prison.

Mr. Sergeant Shee—Yes ; but for debts altogether un-
connected with this suit.

The Lord Chief Baron, addressing Mr. Chambers : You
Can come into court to-morrow if you please, but if +ho
learned counsel on the other side replies that he Is not in a
position to proceed, the arguments must be postponed. He
did not think there was anything unreasonable in a learned
counsel not being prepared to show cause against a rule the
day after the motion was made.
It is understood that Mr. Chambers intends to proceed
to-morrow morning.

COURT OF DIVORCE.
:Before Sir Cresswell Cresswell and a Common Jury.)
WEBSTER V. WEBSTER AND MITFORD.

This was a suit instituted by the husband against his
wife for a dissolution of marriage on the ground of her adul-
tery with the co-respondent, against whom the petitioner
also claimed damages, which were laid at £5,000.
Dr. Phillimore, Q.C., and Dr. Tristram appeared for the
petitioner; Dr. Spinks represented the respondent; and D.
Swabey was counsel for the co-respondent.
The parties were married in April, 1852, the petitioner
at the time being an officer in the 98th Foot, serving in
India. The respondent was the daughter of a clergyman
named Hudbrook, but had been adopted by an eminent
medical practitioner named Murray, at York, and during
his life, and in his testamentary disposition, was treated as
the daughter of Dr. Murray. After the marriage the parties
went to India, but not living in perfect harmony, the re-
spondent returned to England in July, 1853, and resided
with Dr. Murray, who is since deceased. The petitioner
shortly after came to this country, and exchanged into the
19th Foot. Prior to the return of the petitioner a daughter
had been born, and that child was the sole issue of the
marriage. The co-respondent was a captain in the 19th
Foot, and upon the petitioner joining that regiment Capt.
Mitford was introduced to and became familiarly acquainted
with the parties. Captain Mitford (the co-respondent)
changed into the 89th Foot, and, as alleged.
an improper intimacy subsisted between him and the
respondent, at Chatham, Gravesend, and other places,
until the year 1859, when, upon the approaching confine-
ment of the respondent, the result, as stated, of her inter-
course with the co-respondent, she went to live entirely
with Captain Mitford, and is at present living with him as
his wife at Lahore, in tho East Indies, where he is serving
with his regiment. These facts were fully proved.
Dr. Swabey made no defence on the part of the respon-
dent, admitting the adultery as clearly proved.
Dr. Spinks, for the co-respondent, urged that the case
was not one for heavy damages. _ _ _

The Judge Ordinary summed up, and the jury found that
the adultery had been committed, and assessed the damages
at a.

The Court at once pronounced a decree nisi, with costs
against the co-respondent.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL-COUBT—(-Thie Day.:

OLD COURT.
(Before the Recorder.)
BURGLARY.

Two men named Sugden and Daugin were indicted for
committing a burglary on the premises of Mr. Nicholl and
stealing some wearing apparel. _

Evidence proving the facts alleged against the prisoners
having been heard, they were asked in the usual form
what they had to say in answer to the charge.
Daugin said he was passing the house, and, observing
the door open, went to ascertain what, was the matter—cer-
tainly not to commit burglary. Sugden also denied posi-
tively the charge.

The jury found both prisoners guilty.
The Recorder said it was a most extraordinary case.
Two respectable men were found in different parts of
another person's house, with portions of the stolen pro-
perty. With respect to the prisoner Sugden, his master
had given him a good character for honesty and attention
to business, and that after a service of four years and a half.
The sentence of the Court was that Dungin. he being the
eldest, should be committed to prison for nine and Sugden
for four months.

POLICE 11VTELLIGENCE.—(This Day.)

MARLBOROUGH- STREET.
REPITSING TO CARRY A PASSENGER IN AN OMNI
nus.—John Ling, omnibus conductor, badge 1,167, in the
employ of the London General Omnibus Company, was
summoned before Mr. Tyrwhitt for refusing to carry a pas-
senger in omnibus 6,928.
Mr. G. Lewis, of Great Marlborough-street, appeared for
the defendant.
The complainant, a soldier, said he hailed the defendant,
and was about to enter the omnibus, there being room for
one person inside, when the defendant refused to admit
him, saying that he wanted " no soldiers inside ; only
ladies and gentlemen." He was therefore obliged to ride
outside, running the risk of spoiling his clothes through
the rain. A gentleman in the omnibus gave him his name,
and he was now in attendance.
Mr. Phillips, a gentleman residing in Fleet-street, said
he heard the defendant refuse to admit the soldier, saying
he would not admit a soldier, using at the same time some
adjective. He shortly after, however, saw the defendant
admit a gentleman.
Mr. Lewis said that in point of law no offence was com-
mitted as:to constitute the offence. The complainant should
not have ridden at all, whereas ho had ridden outside.
Mr. Tyrwhitt said the only thing was, did the soldier
condone the act by riding outside the omnibus. Any
man who was sober and decent—be he soldier or civilian—
was entitled to ride. He believed the witness for the sol-
dier had no interest in coming forward only from a sense of
justice. It appeared that the conductor did refuse to admit
the man, and perhaps he thought he could get another
passenger on the road. Some people, he knew, had a
terror of red coats. It was a shabby thing to the soldier.
In some countries the man who stood up to, defend his
country had the first chance. He knew it might be said
that the man was saving the seat for a passenger, but that
was a dangerous practice to allow. He should fine the
defendant 10s. and costs.

THIS D4rl

HAY MARKETS.

SMITHFIELD.—Meadow hay, £2 Os to £5 Os Od ; clover
do., £3 5s to £5 18s ; and straw. £1 10s to £2 Os per load.
Both hay and straw moved off heavily at drooping car-
reticles.

CUMBERLAND..-- Meadow hay, £2 Os to a Os ;
clover, £3 lOs to £5 18s Od ; and straw, £1 12s to £2 Os
per load. A. dull trade.

WHITECHAPEL. Meadow hay, S 2 Os to a Os Od ;
clover, £3 lOs to a 18s Od ; and straw, 108 to £2 Oa
per lead. A heavy demand.

COLONIAL.
TEL.—.The market has continued very quiet,without any
change of importance in prices.
SUGAR.--Only a few transactions have been recorded
chiefly for home consumption, without material alteration
in prices. In the refined market dried goods are at rather
lower rates.

COFFEE.—Business has continued quiet, and quotations
are unaltered.

RICE.—No public sales have been reported, and quota-
tions are a shade flatter.
SALTPETRE.—OnIy moderate dealings have taken place
in the better qualities, without any change in values.
TALLow.—The market has been very dull, and a further
decline has taken place in prices, P.Y.C. on the spot being
quoted 52s 9d, and last three months' delivery 62s 6d per
cwt.

MR. STURGEON.—We have received for publi-
cation the following characteristic note :—" Mr Spurgeon
begs to inform the public that ha is knocked up with hard
work, and is compelled to go into the country to rest. This
will upset all his arrangements, and he begs his friends to
remit his promises, and the Christian public not to inundate
him wig), blyitAtims,"—British /NORA

PARLIAIIIEN I2Y DIVISIONS.

HOUSE OF COMMONS-JUNE 10.
APPROPRIATION OP SEATS BILL.
Amendment proposed, in clause 1, line 4, to leave out the
words "and the southern division of Lancashire."
Question put, " That the words proposed to be left out
stand part of the:clause." The committee divided—ayes
228, noes 67.

THIRD EDITION.

SUN OFFICE, Seven o'clock.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—(Tats EVENING.)

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
at five o'clock.

CHIEF JUSTICE MONAGHAN.

The LORD CHANCELLOR drew the attention of the
house to the notice which Lord Leitrim had stated that he
would place on the paper relative to Chief Justice
Monaghan, the judge of the Common Pleas in Ire-
land. The noble lord had made certain statements
relative to this judge, and ho (the Lord Chancellor) said he
felt it was due to that judge to have notice given of the
charges which were made against him of having acted im-
properly while presiding at the assizes of Donegal.
The noble lord (Leitrim) then said he would give
that notice next Thursday, but on reference to the paper
ho found this was merely a notice for a return of
two presentments made to the grand jury at the last Done-
gal assizes.
The Earl of LEITRIM said he had to complain of the
practice that prevailed with judges in Ireland of making
speeches on the bench, but he would be most happy to
second any other motion that might be conceived more
satisfactory-.

After a few words from the LORD CHANCELLOR, the
subject dropped.

TEMPERANCE.

Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from the mem-
bers of the Temperance Societies in the United Kingdom,
praying for an amendment of the law relating to licensing.
The petition was numerously signed, and had been presented
to the other house. The noble and learned lord detailed
some of the evils of the existing law.
The following bills wore read a second time :
Snell's Estate, Clifton Suspension, Edinburgh and Glas-
gow Railway, Workington Tidal Basin and Railway,
Galeshiels and Peebles Railway, Enniskillen and Bun-
doran Railway Bills.
The following bills were read a third time and passed :
Eland Gas; Portadown, Dungannon, and Omagh Junction
Railway ; Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway (New Line) ;
Leeds and Eeland Road; Wycombe Railway (Extension) ;
Midland Railway (additional powers) ; Manchester, Shef-
field, and Lincolnshire Railway (additional works).
THE BOROUGH OF DUBLIN BILL.
Thio bill wont threnigh committee.
GREENWICIr lIOOPITAL DILL.

The Duke of SOMERSET in moving the second reading
of this bill, drew attention to the fact of the great economy
that prevailed in France in regard to the mainten-
ance of pensioners as compared with this country, and
referred to the Hotel des Invalides in illustration of his as-
sertion. The noble lord went through the provisions of the
bill, which he contended would secure greater efficiency in the
management of Greenwich Hospital. He thought some
alterations might be made in the bill, and he proposed that
it should be committed pro forma.
The bill was read a second time without any discussion.
GOVERNMENT OF THE NAVY BILL.

The Duke of SOMERET moved the third reading of
bill.

The Earl of CARNARVON called attention to the
progress making on the continent generally in regard to
the construction of vessels of war. The subject was very
important, for supposing that Italy, Spain, and other
countries that were now engaged in improving their naval
armaments, were to join in a maritime confederacy
the results to this country might be very serious.
He was told that within the last few days there
had been some invention that would produce
considerable revolution in the destructive effects of ord-
nance, in consequence of the power and precision
which had been said to have been obtained. He
reverted to different defects that had prevailed
in reference to our naval architecture,and the construction of
our docks atMalta,and contended that a great improvement
was necessary in order to meet the exigencies of the country
and the altered state of the continent of Europe. He sug-
gested also some alterations in the arsenal at Woolwich
which ho asserted were much required. It appeared that
alterations were determined on with regard to the docks at
➢lalta, but that was countermanded, which showed a de-
gree of vacillation that should not exist in our naval admi-
nistration.