The Sun.
London, England, 1868-06-09 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, JUNE 9, 1565:

LAW INTELLIGENCE.—This Day.

COURT OF DIVORCE.
(Before the Right Hon. Sir J. P. Wilde).
CONRADI V. CONRADI AND WAY, &C.
This was a judgment on the part of the Judge
Ordinary, upon a novel point which has been lately
raised as to whether a petitioner, who has proved
his wife's adultery, has then been found guilty of
adultery himself, and subsequently again obtains a
verdict against his wife for her adultery with fresh
co-respondents ; whether, under these conditions,
he can himself be found guilty upon the decree
that had formerly been made as to his own
adultery. The Judge Ordinary said that the point
raised was an important one. It was, in the first
instance, shown that the petitioner had been found
guilty of adultery at the suggestion of one of the
co-respondents. lie then brought a fresh suit, and
again proved his wife's adultery, inasmuch as she
was living a life of prostitution. The Queen's
Proctor then proposed to bring before the Court
the decree in the other case, in order to prove the
petitioner's adultery, and to disqualify him from
obtaining a divorce. He (the learned judge) con-
sidered that ho could do so, but, taking into
consideration that the accusation of adultery came
from the Queen's Proctor, who was under the direc-
tion, first of the Attorney-General, and then of the
Court, it was competent for the Court to deal in
an equitable manner with the point. It would be
different if the charge were brought forward again
by the co-respondent or respondent, but taking into
consideration the fact that the desertion and adul-
tery of the respondent had been proved, he should
give the petitioner the relief he sought, and grant
a decree nisi.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT—(This Day•

OLD COURT.
THE MURDEROUS ASSAULT BY TWO BOYS.

Mr. Poland, on the part of the prosecution,
asked the learned Recorder that the trial of
the two boys at present in custody for
murderously assaulting Mrs. Munn might be post-
poned until next session, on the ground that the
prosecutrix was at present in such a weak state of
health that any over-excitement might be attended
witb very serious results.

Mr. W. Sleigh, who had been retained to de
end, had no objection to such a proposal.

The Recorder directed the trial to stand post-
poned until next session.
The next case taken before the learned judge was
a post-office robbery by a letter-carrier, which did
not possess the slightest general interest.

/THIRD EDITION.

SUN OFFICE, 7 o'CLocK.

vernment, which was not the case with the present one,
was labouring under the carrying of a vote of
want of confi lence. He thought had ho taken
them only for nine months the greatest difficulty
would be occasioned to the public service. It was only
just that timo should be givoc for those parties to register
themselves under the new Reform Bill, and it was the groat
desire of her Majesty's Government to get the supplemen-
tary measures to the Reform Bill so forward as to enable
all parties to take a lvantage of the 20th of July. He
thought that, taking the most sanguine view of matters,
and supposing all the supplementary measures to pass, it
would bo almost impossible for the now Parliament to meet
except for a very few days before Christmas next—(hear,
hear)—and that it would be soma days before that Parlia-
ment could go into a committee of supply. He thought it
would bo fine steering could they surmount the debate on the
address, and then go into committee. Under such cir-
cumstances it had boon thought advisable to take the
votes of supply for the entire year—(hear, hear)—and not
for nine mouths. (Hear, hear.) It was a burning desire
with the Government to get the Parliament dissolved
(hear, hear)—in order that the opinion of the
country might be taken on a very important
subject, in order that they might be relieved
from a state of things that had been rendered almost
intolerable. (Hear, hear.)

MORNING SITTING.
In reply to Mr. HANICEY,
Mr. DISRAELI said the morning sitting to-morrow was
one apart from the arrangement ho had put forth at the
commencement of the session. He would give the house
an opportunity of expressing its opinion on that point
before any alteration was finally made.

THE IRISLI PRISONERS.
Sir P. lIEYGATE asked the Chief Secretary for Ire-
land whether there was any truth in the statements, copied
from the Weekly News newspaper by the Irish cor-
respondent of the Times of the Ist of June, to
the effect that the Crown solicitor, Mr. S. L. Ander-
son, offered John P. Murray £lOO sterling, with a
Government situation in Ireland or the colonies, provided
that he would give such information as would convict of
Nagle and the other prisoners of the so-called Jackmel
expedition?
The Earl of MAYO said the assertion was totally and
entirely false. (Hear, hear.)

THE ASSASSINATION OF THE DUKE OF
EDINBURGH.

In reply to Colonel VERNER,
Mr. DISRAELI said he had not seen the paper to which
he referred, but he had no reason for believing that the
assassin of the Duke of Edinburgh was insane.
THE SCOTCH REFORM BILL.
The House then went into committee on this bill.
On the motion that clause 6 stand part of the bill,
Mr. GRAHAM said it was a great injustice to Scotland
that the clause should be persisted in, but as opposition
was useless, he and his friends must content themselves
with entering their strongest protest against the clause,
looking to the new Parliament for a remedy.
The clause was then ordered to stand part of the bill.
The LORD-ADVOCATE then brought forward the
following clause to give the lodger franchise, in accord-
ance with the promise given to the hon. member for Kil-
marnock:—Every man shall, in and after the year one
thousand eight hundred and sixty-eight, be entitled
to be registered as a voter, and, when registered, to
vote for a member or members to serve in Parliament for
a burgh, who is qualified as follows (that is to say): is of
full age and not subject to any legal incapacity ; and, as a
lodger, has occupied in the same burgh separately, and as sole
tenant for the 12 months prec_ding thelast day of July in any
year the same lodgings, such lodgings being part of ono and
the same dwelling-house, and of a clear yearly vale°, if
let unfurnished, of ten pounds or upwards ; and has re-
sided in such lodgings during the twelve mouths imme-
diately preceding the last day of July, and has claimed to
be registered as a voter at the next ensuing registration
of voters.
Col. SYKES wished to know whether it was to be
understood that any parson paying ten pounds rent and
not paying poor rates would not have a vote ?
The LORD ADVOCATE signified in the affirmative.
Mr. CR..kWFORD said the clausa would actually dis-
franchise a great many persons who now had the fran-

chise.
The LORD ADVOCATE remarked that the franchise
in the bill under consideration was not a substitute for,
but an addition to, the franchise now in existence.
Mr. D. IPL..4REN said the clause was a disenfran-
chising clause, and so he strongly opposed it.
The LORD ADVOCATE replied that those who at
present possessed the franchise would not bo deprived of
it by the present clause.
Mr. MONCREIFF had great doubt, nowithstanding the
intention of the Lord-Advocate, whether the clause would
not lead to much difficulty.
Mr. BOUVERIE suggested that the best way to get out
of the difficulty was to negative the clause, and then on
the bringing up the report a declaratory clause could be
added, stating that all lodgers paying £lO per annum
shoul I be entitled to vote.
An hon. member suggested that there was no need to
strike the clause out, as it could easily be altered to em-
brace the latter part of the suggestion of the hon. mem-
ber for Kilmarnoa.
This was done, and the clause was ordered to stand
part of the bill.
A clause to make provision for claims by persons im-
properly and erroneous exempted from the payment of
poor rates was then considered and agreed to.
On schedule A, which enh.rges the boundaries of the
city of Glasgow, so as to include the suburbs of Partick
and Govan, there was a lively debate, and ultimately the
opposition, led by Sir E. Colebrook°, succeeded in strik-
ing the schedule out of the bill by a majority of five (91
to 8G).
The other schedules were agreed to without opposition,
and the bill was ordered to be reported on Thursday.
The house next took up the Boundary Bill in com-
mittee, and, on the question that the preamble be post-

poned,
Mr. GORST raised a general discussion by reviewing
the position in which the house is placed by the discor-
dant reports of the commission and the committee. Re
criticised stringently the conclusions at which the com-
mittee has arrived, maintaining that neither by its superior
information, nor by its impartial composition, was it a
competent tribunal to review the judgment of the Com-
missioners, and pointing that the committee had been
governed by no kind of intelligible principle, except this
—that municipal and Parliamentary boundaries ought to
be conterminous. The inference he drew from this was
that the houso should discuss patiently and form its own
opinion on every one of the cases about which the com-
mittee and the Commission differed.
Mr. WALPOLE remarked that the difficulty arose
entirely from the vague and insufficient instructions given
to the Commission, which had made it impossible for them
to lay down a general principle which would apply to all
cases. Assuming that the controversy practically
would be confined to the 15 large boroughs in which the
Committee had differed entirely from the Commission, he
went through the list seriatim, explaining the reasons on
which the committee bad acted, and justifying their con-
clusions. With regard to the immediate practical. ques-
tion, Mr. Walpole said that though the Committee sub-
mitted their report entirely to the decision of the house
much time would be lost if it was to be set aside, and he
certainly should not have consented to give so many days
to the committee if its labours were to be fruitless. By
way of general observation he expressed his decided pre-
ference for making municipal and Parliamentary bounda-
ries conterminous, and warned the house of the danger of
ncreasing those great urban constituencies by additions
which made them three or four times as large as the
counties in which they stood.
Mr. STOPFORD argued strenuously for throwing over
the committee in favour of the Commission's Report.
Mr. BRIGHT was entirely satisfied with the proceed-
ings of the committee and with the rules on which they
they had acted, and urged the house to accept its report
which was perfectly satisfactory to all the people con-
cerned. Tho house, ho maintained, by its original appoint-
ment of a Commission, had declared itself unfit to go into
the details of the matter, and the Government, when the
committee was formed, announced that its report was to
be final. This last statement, however, was disputed by
Mr. HARDY.
Mr. NEWDEGATE and Mr. PERCY WYNDHAM joined in
urging the house not to give up its power of review, and
Mr. DISRAELI denied that the Government had
pledged itself to be bound by the report of the committee.
His recommendation now was that the house should go on
with the bill without further loss of time, and, trusting to
the practical good sense which had so often been shown,
he anticipated that all the difficulties of the schedules,
which were not numerous, would soon be satisfactorily
disposed of.

Mr. GL ADS T 0 NE reprobated strongly this course. To
attach so little weight to the recommendations of their own
committee was most unparlismentary, and involved the
practical loss of three weeks.
Mr. PATJLL animadverted severely on the party mo-
tives of the appointment of this committee, and
Sir F. C. CROSSLEY advised the house to take the ad-
vice of the Premier, and go on with the bill.
Mr. OSBORNE held that the house had arrived now
at a supreme point of stultification. The only escape
from the situation was to renew the amendment of Mr.
llibbert to leave out clause 4, and for this purpose he moved
that. the Chair an report progress.
Mr. WHITBREAD defended himself against some im-
putations of Mr. Gorst on his perfect impartiality, and
denied emphatically that the committee had listened to
party considerations or arguments.
Mr. DISRAELI, in consenting to report progress, re-
peated that the course he had suggested was the most prac-
tical and convenient —the only mode, iu fact, of getting
through the bill.
The further progress of the bill was then adjourned
until Thursday.
Tho Regulation of Railways Bill, which has come down
from the Lords, was read a second time, as was also the
Turnpike Trusts Continuance Bill.
Some other bills were forwarded a stage, and the house
adjourned at a quarter to 1 (At .