The Sun.
London, England, 1868-05-23 00:00:00

LAW AND POLICE.

IMPORTANT DECISION WITH REGARD TO THE RIGHTS
OF MARRIED WOMEN.— The case of Fleet (administrator)
v. Perrens was decided in the Court of Queen's Bench,
and the judgment of Mr. Justice Blackburn shews what
some of the rights of married women are. The case raised
a question as to the capacity of a married woman to
acquire and retain pecuniary interests when the husband
does not intervene. The plaintiff sued to recover a sum
received by defendant for his son's wife. He first sued
as administrator of his son, the husband, who had sur-
vived his wife, and had afterwards died. He, however,
being advised that he was wrong in claiming it in right
)f the husband, discontinued that action, and now
sued as administrator of the wife, and the question was
whether he was entitled to recover in her right. At the trial
before Mr. Justice Lush, letters toher from defendant were
put in which were such as, if addressed to afemme sole, would
beyond all doubt have shewn that the defendant promised
tier to hold some money for her which he had received
from a third party. There was no evidence that the
husband had in any way interferred either to allow his wife
to have the control of the money, or to prevent her from
dealing with it, nor, indeed, whether he knew of its
existence or not. It was objected that the cause of action
did not accrue to the wife, and that therefore the plaintiff
as her representative was not entitled to recover, but
could only sue as representative of the husband. Mr.
Justice Blackburn, in giving judgment, said there was no
doubt that all personal property of a corporal nature, such
as goods or cash, belonging to the wife before marriage
vests in the husband by the marriage, and that all such
property given to or acquired by the wife after marriage
also vests in the husband. But rights of action belonging
to the wife before marriage do not vest in the husband
unless he does some act to reduce them into possession
during the marriage. And even during marriage the hus•
band may permit the wife to make a contract in an action
in which he may join with her during her life, though he
may disaffirm the interest, and sue on the contract as
made with himself alone. If he permits the wife to make
such a contract and does not reduce it into possession
:luring the coverture, it survives to the wife. Judgment
was given for the plaintiff.
ACTION AGAINST SIR M. PETO.—In the same court
an action was brought against Sir Morton Peto by a Mr.
Vigers, a contractor, who had agreed to carry away
the materials extracted from the excavations for
the Metropolitan Railway, for which he was to be paid
Is. 4d, per cubic yard. The point was as to the meaning
of the words "per cubic" yard—whether that meant the
yard in situ (i.e., as the soil lay in the earth) or the yard
as it was measured after excavation when the materials
were loose. The difference would be enormous ; a matter
of some thousands of pounds. The Lord Chief Justice, in
giving judgment in favour of the defendant, said, taking
the words as they stood, it might be that the plaintiff's view
would be right ; but, taking them in the sense in which
they were understood in the business, according to the
finding of the jury (upon evidence the court deemed ad-
missible), the defendant's view was the right one—that
"per cubic yard" meant the earth as it stood before exca-
vation.

SEnious CASE.—The Mayor of Henley held an inquiry
as to the cause of death of Emily Stevens, a young lady
Who died within Lis jurisdiction on Sunday. Several
witnesses were examined, and the evidence shewed that
the deceased had lived as wife with Mr. David H. Barling,
a gentleman residing in London and a member of the
United Service Club. They had travelled together some
time, but latterly resided at Henley, and last week, the
deceased being very indisposed, Mr. Brooks, a surgeon,
attended, but before leaving told Mr. Barling that there
was something that he could not make out, and
the latter informed him that abortion had been
procured. The lady died, and a post-mortem exami-
nation was held ; but it being thought necessary that
Professor Taylor should view the body, the inquest was
adjourned for that purpose. Mr. Barling was ordered by
the coroner to find £5OO bail, and enter into his own recog-
nisance in the like sum to appear at the adjourned
inquiry.

EXTENSIVE ROBBERIES FROM AN EMPLOYER.—At the
Middlesex Sessions, William Rose was charged with steal
ng nearly two hundred pairs of boots, the property of Mr.
Henry Kelsey, his master, and John Purvis and Joseph
Stoddon were charged with receiving the same knowing
them to have been stolen. The evidence clearly shewed
that Mr. Kelsey bad been the victim of an extensive
system of robbery. Rose, who had been in his employ
some time, was left to take care of the shop during the
breakfast hour, and he managed that the other prisoners
should be at a coffee-shop, and when he sent for his breakfast
one of them should slip round and receive a bag from
Rose. Rose was sentenced to eighteen months' hard
labour, Purvis to two years' imprisonment, and Stoddon,
who had previously been convicted of fraud, to seven
years' penal servitude.

WHAT IS A TRESPASS ?-At Wandsworth Police-court,
Mr. J. C. Richardson was summoned for trespassing on
the West London Extension in Battersea-fields, and
refusing to quit the line. It seemed that one of the com-
pany's platelayers cautioned the defendant not to cross
the line, and the latter replied he should do so when he
liked. The witness, in answer to the magistrate, said
that the defendant was in the public road when
he spoke to him. Mr. Dayman said that being
the case the summons could not be sustained,
as there was no refusal to quit the line. The magistrate
was then referred to a case in which a milkman had been
fined in that court for trespassing upon the line at the same
place. Mr. Dayman said in that case a watch was kept for the
milkman,whowasknown to cross the line at a particular hour.
In this case the defendant had passed over the line before
he was cautioned. He thought that if the company's ser-
vants caught persons on the line who refused to return by
the way they had come they would be justified in laying
hold of nein, for trespassers had no right to choose their
way of leaving. The summons was dismissed.

The Earl and Countess of Kinnoull are placed in
mourning through the death of their second daughter,
Lady Evangeline Hay.

We regret to hear of the deaths of two of the
medical officers of the British service in Abyssinia—
namely,S taff-Assistant-Surgeon John Collins, and
John IL Stewart, M.D. The former joined the expedi-
tion from this country, and the latter from Bombay.—
Medical Times and Gazette.

SCENE IN NORDEN CHURCII.-At the Rochdale
Police-court, the Rev. Mr. Whitehead, the recently-
appointed vicar of Norden, has applied for a summons
against Mr. James. Rawstron, the parishioners' church-
warden, for disturbing him while performing divine ser-
vice. Mr. Rawstron was lately elected with a view to
checking the ugh Church practices at Norden, and on
Sunday morning as the complainant stood in the chancel,
he walked up to him and, as it is alleged, snatched the
flowers from a vase which he (Mr. Whitehead) Nyas hold-
ing. The application 1911 granted.