The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-04-29 00:00:00

- - -
was attached to the Professorship.. the Court ongbt not to
grant the Writ prayed for ; and ;Willy. that the application
ought to have been made to the King in Council, who alone
could grant redress.
Mr. ALDERSON wag about to follow on the same side, but
as the Lord Chief Justice was going to sit at Nisi Prius at
one o'clock, it was agroed that the Learned Cdunsel should

be heard tojroorrow. -
The Loren CHILI' JUSTICE, at one o'clock, proceeded to
try some Common Jury eases of no general Interest.

PREROGATIVE COURT.
GOA, a. GILL.
This was originally a suit brought against Mr. Gill, a
gentleman of fortune, for restitution of conjugal rights.
In bar of the suit, Mr. Gill pleaded that his wife had
been guilty of adultery. This allegation was tried by
the Court, which ultimately pronounced a sentence, not
acquitting Mrs. Gill of the charge, bet declaring that h►r
innocence was completely established, and Mr. Gill was
ordered by the Court to take his wife home : the sextetter
directing, in the usual terms, that he should treat her
with conjugal affection. In March, Id-2, lie brought in
an allegation, stating that he bail obeyed the sentence of
the Court. On the part of the wife it was denied that he
obeyed the sentence of the Court, and treatedlier with
conjugal affection. Evidence to this effect was heard.
which stated, that when she returned to his protection,
he again t barged her with arts of infidelity, and treated
her in such a manner as compelled her to leave him.—
The Court then pronounced him contumacious, and re-
fused to disrojss the snit. Ile now appeared before the
Court, alleging that lie hail submitted to the sentence.
and praying to be dismissed.
Doctor Swany opal-tired on behalf of the wife. and ob-
jected to the dismissal of M. Gill. on the ground th .t
the orders of the Coln had been disobeyed by Mr. Gill,
in sealing his stile a letter, in which hi' repeated th •
charge.of which she had been declared innocent, an I
also on the ground that he did not take his wife to hi c
proper home.
Mr. Gill himself replied. I4e entered into a deal is
which lie said he had done all in his rower to confer' m tag
the sentence of the Court, hut was prevented by the tits,.
stinacy of his wife, who declared she woahl not go I •411
to Itiltafa. The Court seater •ed him to " love, honour.
and cherish" his wife. Now this was impossible—alt the
law could oblige hint to do was to receive her in hie
house and provide her with all that was necessary for her
comfort—no temporal authority could compel his Wet -
tions. If the Court had such a power, all the wives its
England, nay, even Lady Nichol herself, might come to
the Court to obtain this most valuable of all decrees.
The Court were bound to act on the principle of the com-
mon law, which only bound man and wife to live toge-
ther, allowing hint to tell her of her faults, and to !don't
her to amend, allowing both to use towards each other
any expressions they might think proper to adopt, and
him to do what he hail not done—to beat her provided
he did not beat ben too outrageously. lie then con
tended that he had acted in conformity with the common.
law.
Sir Joitar NICUOT. said the defendant was bound to
take his wife to his bone fhb: home, and treat her as his
wife, but she was not to be treated as an adultress. The
Petition of Mr. was rejected, and be was refused a
dismissal from the authority of the Court.
IN RR CLARKSON.
In this case the Court pronounced judgment against
the defendant, who was charged with having over-
charged in a bill of fees, and improperly obtained busi-
ness from another practitioner. The defendant was send
tense( to be suspended for l'lmonths, and the Court said,
that in the eve of the establishing of any future charge he
should be entirely removed.