The Sun.
London, England, 1868-02-01 00:00:00

THE SU N, LONDON, SAT URDAY EVE \TING, FEBRUARY 1, 1868.

Business
done.

4Si 2 i 1
181 8

1174 i i i
82

'i(l7 9 74 Si 9

[ti 6
1104. 5, i 4 54

35a .

LAW IN TEL LIGENCE.-1 his I ay.

THE COUNTESS D'ALTEYRAC AND LORD
WILLOUGHBY D'ERESBY.

In the after-term iittings, in the Court of Queen's
Bench, before the Lord Chief Justice and a special jury,
this extraordirary action came on for hearing. It was
brought to recover certain goods, &c., the property of gui
plaintiff. The plaintiff is the divorced wife of Count
D'Alteyrac, of high family and position in France, and an
officer in the French navy ; and the defendant is the
Grand Chamberlain of England. The parties became
acquainted in Paris in 1847, and in 1849 they lived together
as man and wife in London, and continued to do so until
1864, when a disagreement took place between them rela-
tive to the noble lord's familiarity with one of the maid-
servants, which ultimately led to their separation. A
daughter, the result of the cohabitation of the plaintiff and
defendant, was now living, and her education had beet
superintended by the defendant. The defendant, after the
separation, sold allthe property at Cam Lodge, Twicken-
ham, for £B,OOO, which property the plaintiff claimed as
hers, and for which this action had been brought. The
defendant had made no provision for the plaintiff and her
child. Mr. Coleridge, Q.C., and Mr. Philbrick were
counsel for the plaintiff ; and Mr. Hawkins, Q.C.,
and Mr. J. 0. Griffits were counsel for the defendant.—
The Countess was then called and deposed : In 1847 I
was living in Paris ; my husband was travelling at that.
time. In that year I made the defendant's acquaintance.,
I came to England in 1849 to meet the defendant, and
since that time I have lived with him as his wife. I tra-
velled with him in Switzerland and Germany. There
was a daughter born, who was educated and brought
up as Miss Willoughby. I was known as Mrs.
Willoughby, and was called so by his lard-
ship. In 1849 he took apartments for me in Argyle,
street, and after that ahouse was taken at 4, Vincent-street,
Ovington-square, for the purpose of our residing there.
That was at the end of 1850 or beginning of 1851. At that
time I had £1,600 in my possession of my own money,
which was used in furnishing and decorating the house
according to our joint wishes. The furniture and
plate I had in Paris were brought to London
for furnishing this house. It included articles of
Dresden and Sevres china ; my crest and cypher were
upon the plate, and the household linen was marked in my
name: Defendant was then in a bad state of health,
almost dying, and I nursed and attended him for about
fifteen months. In November 1852 he was extremely ill,
and wrote a letter addressed to his father, in which he
asked him to make provision for the plaintiff, and stating
that all the property in the house belonged to her, and
which she was to use if he died.

The case was adjourned to Monday. His Lordship
suggested that it should be left to some man of honour,
known to both parties, to say whit should be done between
them.

A CASE OP DIVORCE.—In the Divorce Court, before biz
J. P. Wilde, the case of Edwards v. Edwards and Theo-
balds, which had been already part heard, was decided.
The petitioner lived at Bridport, in Dorsetshire, with his
father, but in the year 1846 he came to London, and lived
in the house of his uncle. The latter had a daughter some
years older than the petitioner, and it was alleged
that she bad " seduced " him. In the following year,
she being enceinte by him, they were married at
Abchurch, in the City. After the ceremony was per-
formed they separated, and Lad never lived together
since. In the meantime, the wife obtained employment
as a governess—first at Friming,ham, in Norfolk, and
afterwards at Bridport ; but in 1853 she disappeared, and
was not discovered till about six months before the present
proceedings were commenced, when it was alleged she was
living with the co-respondent. A great deal of evidence
was given to prove these allegations. On the other side,
many witnesses were called to speak as to the adultery of
the petitioner, but their evidence entirely broke down,
and the attorney was severely censured by the court for
not having thoroughly ascertained what would be the
nature of their evidence.—The learned judge granted a
decree nisi for a divorce, and found that no wilful separa-
tion had taken place at all.

made, and I hear nothing to his disparagement
beyond this. He is fined 405., and, in default, a
month's imprisonment.

The Rev. Father Bingham, of the church of the
Holy Family, Saffron-hill, who had written a letter
to the Lord Mayor, stating that the prisoner had
attended his school during the winter evenings,
and that he was a quiet, inoffensive young man,
here stepped forward, and said he would pay the
fine.

The Lord Mayor—You knew the law, that it was
my duty to fine him?

Father Bingham said he did not know that such
was the case. Ile believed the offence was com-
mitted on the spur of the moment, without thought,
and that if the prisoner had been able to keep the
paper in his pocket, and think over the matter, he
would not have pasted it up.

The Lord' MAyor---You can hardly urge that.
He put up one the week before.
Father Bingham—He knows very well how
,► rorgly he li is acted, but I am sure it was'uot done
from any bad motive, but simply on the spur of the
moment. The iritials found in the memorandum-
book, "C. If. F.," are thosl of my church. He is
a very good boy, and has never attended any-secret
society, and in fact has no time to do so.

Sir William hose (addressing the rev. gentle-
man) said—l am bound to say that the pasting up
of two seditious placards on this honk is a very

serious crime.

Father Bingham —The parents are extremely
poor, and they Caine to me and stated what had

occurred.

Sir William Rose—lt is a very serious crime.
Father Bingham—But the parents are poor, and
cannot pay the fine.

Sir William Rose—Well, he ought to go to

prison.
The Lord Arayor—l am very sorry the law does
not allow me to give him a month's imprisonment
without the option of a fine.

Father Bingham—l pay it because the parents
are unable to do so, and the boy, if sent to gaol,
would lose his situation and be without a place. I
am very much obliged.
The prisoner was then discharged.