The Sun.
London, England, 1868-04-20 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, APRIL 20, 1868.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.—This Day.

ROLLS' COURT.
(Before the Master of the Rolls.)
TOM SATERS AND HIS CHILDREN.

To-day was specially appointed for the hearing
of the case in relation to the children of Tom
Sayers; whether the children, four in number, born
after the marriage with the present Mrs. Sayers,
were entitled to the property left by Sayers, and
which was claimed on behalf of his two illegitimate
children by the same woman. About £3,000
had been left by Sayers, out of the col-
lection made after his fight with Heenan.
He bad separated from his wife, and several chil-
dren were born after the separation, and were not,
it was alleged, the children of Sayers, as his wife
had gone to live with a cabman, and he had lived
with his brother's wife, his brother being alive at the
time.

Several witnesses (principally women) were
called to show that after the separation there had
been access between the husband and wife;. they were
frequently dwelling together, and appeared in com-
pany. The evidence revealed a sad picture of the
inner life of the parties.

The Master of the Rolls, in giving judgment, said
the strong presumption from the evidence was that
three of the claimants born between 1861 and 1864
were the children of Tom Sayers, and that the child
born in 1866 was not his. The property, therefore,
will go to these claimants.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
JONES V. lIEASEMAN-BREACII OF PROMISE OF

MARRIAGE.

This was an action for breach of promise of marriage
by Miss Mary Ann Jones, of Nelson-square, Rother-
hithe, against John Heaseman, a timber merchant,
carrying on business at the York-road, Lambeth.
From the evidence of the sister of the plaintiff, it
appeared that she carried on the same business,
with the aid of her brother as the defendant,
and about the early part of last (year he paid great
attention to the plaintiff. Matters went on until it
became the impression of all parties that the de-
fendant intended to marry the plaintiff. This
supposition was looked upon as true from a con-
versation which took place with the defendant and
the plaintiff's brother-in-law, on which occasion the
defendant asked the plaintiff's relative which
would make the best wife, Mary Ann or
her sister, as he intended to marry the
former. After this the brother-in-law, his wife,
and plaintiff went to the defendant's house to supper,
and here again he (defendant) said in the presence
of all that he thought they would make a happy
couple, and that she (plaintiff) had only to name the
day. However, time went on, and when the plain-
tiff's relations consulted with the defendant, he said
he never had any idea of making her his wife.
Evidence having been given as to the property of
the defendant, _ .

Mr. Sergeant Ballantine addressed the jury for
defendant, and said the jury would have to
draw their own conclusions with respect to the case,
but he thought, after they had heard what he had
to say, they would be inclined to say that no pro-
mise had been made. Here were two people, not in
the heyday of youth 'when the blood was hot, but
at the steady age of 30 and 50, one contending that
he had promised marriage, and the other denying
that he had done so. It had been said that the
defendant had made the promise in the presence
of the plaintiff's friends, but his conduct showed
that such a thing was highly improbable. Nothing
could so fully corroborate that as the
alleged conduct of the defendant when the
lady on one occasion became mixed up in
a crowd when the stalwart arm of a lover
would have been of use. (Laughter.) He quitely
lets the lady fight her way through, and then they
calmly go home to supper. That was certainly what
a real lover would not do under such circumstances
p —he would of all things prefer to be in a crowd
with the object of his young heart's fondest affec-
tion—(laughter)—because it offered facilities for
a thousand little attentions (laughter)—which
could nob fail to make a deep impression. The whole
thing he (Sergeant Ballantine) looked upon as an
attempt to get money from the defendant, who,
after all, would not have been a very desirable hus-
band, because his education had been much neg-
lected in his youth—(laughter)—which was a very
long time ago—(loud laughter)—and his property
only consisted of a house of three rooms and a tim-
ber yard. When the defendant went with the lady
to East Grinstead it was to look at some timber,
and the whole thing had arisen from a
quarrel which had taken place after that,
because the defendant would not lot the
plaintiff have the timber. He was quite ready to
trust himself—(laughter)—but not his timber.
(Renewed laughter.) If they gave the plaintiff a
verdict it would be a very serious matter for all old
leashelors, and with respect to the term " Dear
Miss Jones," in his letters, it was only meant as the
usual compliment, just as people always sign
" Yours obediently,,, when very many times they
would like to kick you. (Laughter.)
The learned Judge summed up the evidence, and
the jury gave
a verdict for the plaintiff—
damages, £5O.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.-THIS DAY.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

CRUELTY TO A HORSE.—Charles Rey, a young
man, son of a green-grocer, of No. 36, King-street,
Soho, was charged, by the Royal Society for the
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, with working a
horse while in an unfit state_

Simeon Gell, an officer of the Royal Society for
the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, saw the pri-
soner driving an old grey horse attached to a van
laden with coke, and seeing that it was in a deplora-
ble condition, and bad diseased hocks, he stopped the
prisoner, and recommended him to take the horse
home. The prisoner promised to do so, but at a
late hour he saw the prisoner again n orking the
horse, and he then took him into custody. The
horse was very old, had scarcely any flesh on its
bones, had diseased legs and hocks, and had a
diseased hind foot. The prisoner's father was will-
ing to have the horse destroyed.
The Magistrate said that the horse should be
destroyed, and on seeing a certificate to that effect
he would discharge the prisoner.

TIIE FIRE IN GERRARD-STREET.—ASSAULT ON A
CONSTABLE.—Dominick Nicols, a Frenchman, was
charged before Mr. Tyrwhitt with assaulting Police-
constable Thomas Leader, 146 A R, and resisting
him while in the execution of his duty at a fire at a
chemist's in Gerrard-street, Soho, where the
Japanese troupe playing at the Lyceum Theatre
were lodging.
Police-constable Thomas Leader, 146 A R, said
that at half-past six o'clock on Saturday evening he
was on duty at
a fire at a chemist's in Gerrard-
street, Soho, when the prisoner and several others
of the lowest foreigners came up and tried to force
the crowd. He told the prisoner
their way through
to stand back, and tried to keep him back, when he
struck him a violent blow on the chest, and then
ran away, but he was afterwards taken into custody
in a public-house, when he said that he had
been helping to remove property from the
house on fire, and that his object in going to the
house was to get paid for doing so.
The prisoner said he never touched anything at
the fire, and that if he struck the constable he was
sorry for it.

Police-Sergeant Appleton, 26 C, said that he was
at the fire, and saw the prisoner and some of the
lowest and most turbulent foreigners in the neigh-
bourhood trying to force their way through the
crowd. The prisoner struck the last witness,
upon which a number of foreigners closed round
him, so as to let him escape, and he ran into a
public-house, where ho (the sergeant) took him
into custody.

Mr. Tyrwhitt said the police were protecting pro-
perty at a fire, and giving room to the firemen to
enable them to extinguish the fire, when the pri-
soner thought proper to assault one of them, for
which ho would have to pay 205., or 14 days.