Star.
London, England, 1827-12-07 00:00:00

ROBECK.

This was a suit for divorce, promoted' by-the Warne
de Robeck against the Baroness Isis wife, by reason of
aduttery, committed with Lord Sussex Lennox, with
wi om she eloped (roll Faits in January last. A ver•
dict had been obtaked against his Lordship by the hus-
band in a Court Li Law, with damages to the amount
of 2 500/.
Dr. LUSHINOTON, for the Biron, contented himself
with gising a short statement of the facts.
. P 1111.4.111110113, for the Baroness,-stated, that afte
full consideration of the evidence. it did not appear that
he should for ward the interests of his client by opp siug
the sentence pre, ed.
Joan NICHOLL said, dui facts of the cue were
eta. melt/ clear.' The parties were married in Ireland;
id September 18i20 ;tt ey cohabited together, and had
five children, dire-.: of whom were still living. In the
eon's, of the last year they resi Jed in Paris, it the Hotel
de Dauvres, rue dc la Pais. It appeared that the Ba-
reness employed a young woman in her service to carry
notes to Lord Sussex Lewin', who lodged on the oppo-
site ride of the street. Alter some correspondence of
this kind, on the 13th &January last, during the ab-
sence of the Baron, his wife quitted the Aotel, with her
servant, and went to. the Hotel de l'Empereur, where
she was met by Lord Sussex Lennox, acid they cohabited
there as man and wile. They afterwards occgpied priiate
lodgings at Paris; and sribsequently proceeded to Rouen,
continnthg to lite together as man and wife up to the'
date of the citation in the present suit. The Baron, find-
ing that his wife was gone, was in a state of distraction.
For the injury be had receivtd he had recovered a large
sum in a Court of Law. Under these circumstances-, he

WAS cleArly entitled to the sentence he prayed, and
Court pronouncal for the separation.

BRAT AGAINST BRAT.
This was originally a suit in the Conlistory C.
for divorce, by reason of cruelty, promoted by Mrs.
Saba Eliza Bray, against her husband, the Rev. Bidlake
Bray. The .4efenclant appealed from the sentence of
the Learned Jedge of the Court, who had admitted the
libel, and the question of its admissibility scow came for
,rehearing before this., the superior Court. The circum-
stances of the case had been already disclosed pretty
fully in the Court of King's Bench, upon the trial of
some of the parties concerned for a conspiracy, who,
were acquitted.
1)r. PHILLISIORE, for the Rev. Mr. Bray, the appel-
lant, prayed a reversal of the sentence of the Court
below; on Abe ground of the extraneous and frivolous,
nature of the matter contained in the libel, which went
into the whole'life and history of the other party, and;
was spun out to 56 articles. If capable of proof, the
evidence would•eztt nil the cause beyond the limits of
any preceding suit of this kind, without assisting the
judicial mind of the Court. The paftiei were married
in April, 1825, and a citation was served upon his
client in the beginning of 1827 ; so that in little more
than 19 mouths matter was to be off Ided to fill 56
articles. This Court would, he hoped, be on its guard,
lest its process should be employed to opfress the de.
fendant. The Learned Advocate then examined the
allegations in detail. In order t,) rebut the accusation
of Mr. Bray,ol an incestuous connexion between his wife
and her maternal uncle Mr. Hammersley, with whoen
the pat ties lived, it had been thought necessary to relate
all the minute circumstances attending the death of the
Lady's father, and her being consigned to here urcle's
protection. One of the articles pleaded a stipulation.
before marrisge, that, in conseques ce ef the Lad)'s de
licaie state of health, the party should live with Mr.
Ilammersley and Mrs. M ilken, Mrs. Bray's mother.
But the Court would not sanction such anti nop.ial
contracts, which were calculated to create dissension.
One ar iee alleged that whilst they were at (Mind
Mr. I.l.ray kicked his wife on the shin at the tea table,
and when she sheaved hits ehe k•nn her leg, he said
she had been amusing herself with scratching the skin
ff. An ther article al.eged, that as Mr.. Bray was
taking a walk, he went up to her and pinched her fin-
ger. These were ludicrtms instances of cruelty. Ano-
ther example of cruelty was Mr. Bray's requiring his
wife to fall on her knees, and swear on the Bible that
s! e loved him, and requiring her mother, Mrs. Malkin,
to swear in a similar marine: that she believed it, which
they consented to du in order to grain him. If the pre-
sent case had been a suit of a different description, these
circumstances might have had sonic %%eight. Then there
was pinching his w ife on a sofa, "carrying the child in
an improper manner, refusing to let Mrs. Bray come
to London to consult Mr. Vance, the surgeon, about
a disorder in the trachea with which she -was afflicted;
and when Mrs. Malkin became extremely ill and
lost her senses, refusing to let his wife see her.-..
The first 23 articles, he c-ntended; were loose, vague,
without specification, arid frivolou,; all of them re-
quired reform, and were almost wholly inadmissible.—
Tire subsequent articles were still more objectionable;
they pleaded consultations with a barrister (Mr. Abra
hams), and all the negotiations between the attornies.
Wha: hal the Court to do with this? Then the closing
articles pleaded that same anonymons lett, rs of a must
disgusting description had been written by Mr. Bray.'
in a feigned hand,- 4. or by some other person by his
direction?" It a cha ge of•cruelty coolti be Made
against the appellant; it could be brought into a shorter
compass, and made snore specific. It was the duty of
his Counsel to bring the case before the Court, which
must be anxious to prevent its process being; made thei
instrument of injustice. • I
Di. JESSE imams was on the same side.

Dr. Lusistuu rot•, for Mts. Bray, the respondent, be-
g.:n by stating that he was inxructed to say. with respect
to the expenses in this suit, that no claim would be
made for costs till the end of the cause, when that
point would be left entirely to the Court. With regard
to the generality of the pleas in this case. it was to be
recollected that this was one of a peculiar kind, not
consisting of isolated acts of atrocious cruelty. The
Learned Advocate then proceeded to show the necessity
for the introduction of the various passages objected to.
He and his learned friend Dr. Jesur had duae their ut-