Star. — 1826-08-24 (London, England)

PARIS TRIBUNAL DE PREMIERE INSTANCE.  • CR IK. cox. In the sittings of the Bth, 1 1 th, and 12th of August, M. Claveau, the Counsel for the husband, replied to M. Bennequin in the divorce cause "Desprez v Desprez'." " Madame Desprez," said he, " is beautiful, amiable, and witty; she has received a first rate education; plays in a most superior manner upon the pianoforte, and is something of a coquette." She had lived happily for. five years, when she became enceinte. Her temper now underwent a change.' After her accouchement she fell into a gloomy melancholy, took a strong dislike to her husband, and conceived a passion successively for two young men with whom she entered into a correspondence. ' Here M. Claveau read some letters, in which ',Warne Desprez avowed 10 her husband the "serntiment ardent yet pure" which she nourished for him.— One of the young men, a physician, advised her husband to allow his wife' to quit the conjugal roof for a time, for the benefit of her health. M. Desprez having consented to this temporary absence, his wife wrote to him a letter, in which she says—" from this day, Sept. 10; 1823, r renounce my husband, and refuse to have any personal communication with him, the consequence of which will of course be, that. I can have no more legitimate children provided he will leave me my own sntstress." Soon after Medanno.Desprez was sent to Charantoti (the French Bedlam), whence she wrote again is her husband, speaking to him respecting her connec• don with these two young men, and declaring that she hid only acted as she had done with regard to them, because she had riot a single being to whom she could confide her sorrows. She was dismissed as cured, and bl..Desprez thought at first that she was become sane; he deceived himself, she was meditating a divorce.— Nearly thirty allegations had been made by Madame Desprez: how had they been proved? The blow? Was that proved ? No! The oath of conjugal fidelity taken on the gospels? Not The threat to throw hir out of the window? Not The menace said to be made in the coffee-house of cutting off her hair ? No! That of thrusting out her eyes and disfiguring her beauty ? Nol Madame Desprez pretended that her husband made her get up toe early, that he bad reproached her with going to Engbien to look for a gallam; that he spat in her face on one occasion, and that he made her sink under ill-treatment on the 16th of May, 1824; that he had said a man Mit beat his wife, provided he took care not to murder her; that he had regretted that he had not broken one of her arms, adding, that he should have been let off for a fine of 16 francs. Not a single witness bad deposed to these facts. He had spitten repeatedly, she said, in her face; he had accused a librarian of being his wife's gallant, and had threatened to throw an Abbe out of the window upon a similar suspicion. Not s Toad of proof of all this. There temained three facts of no great consequence, insigni&sat inahemselves, and by no means proved. To these three witnesses were brought, a father-ia-law, who had admitted baying beaten his son-in law; a mother-inlaw; and a widow, who bad had a child after her husband's decease. t is for you to say how much credit too may choose to attach to such witnesses. These injuries have been charged to him alone. But they were mutual according to one of the witnesses, and a servant bad deposed that her mistress had sung to the piano a song, commencing, " My father has given me a busbead who is a rogue end a dwarf; and that M. Desprez cook his hat and went out. As to the black eye, not a single witness had seen the husband int ct it. The medical man did not know whether the wound was an accidental er a pretended one, and declared that he was unable to speak positively on the subject. What would Clete be surpri4ng in MadameDesprez, who, according to the misters of Chessmen, bad once attempted suicide, having hurt herself against a window, or some piece of furniture? M. Claveau then opposed the counter evidence of many witnesses who attested the good conduct of Mons. Desprez towards his wife. He read some letters, which went to prove that there was, en his part, no wish for a separation. In one of the first she says to him, " I am your wife, and you will listen tomy entreaty. (This was to leave her the child).— Answer, answer, my friend. Adieu. adieu. I thank you for the little box. You remember the taste 1 bave for miniatures." " What," said M. Claveau, "is this an enemy speaking thus affectionately to her tyrant, and accepting prexnts from him?' In another letter she'solicits an interview with her husband. " It is easy," she says, " to comprise in one half hour's conversation snore than in ten or twelve letters. You fear, they tell me, that you shall make me ill by your presence. I have lived six years without you, and yet I exist. Besides, 1 can never forget that you are the father of my Laura." More recently she writes to him—" Unhappy man! you hare never known the desire of love I I charge upon you all the faults which I have committed. I owe you nothing more. You have silenced the voice of religion, which cried out to me that I was your wife ! You are ignorant how much weakness there is still in my heart. Alas! on Sunday. at five o'cloik, I held my portrait., which I had had painted, in my bands, without daring to examine my heart. I found an indescribable pleasure ia thinking now it will not be for you ; I am going now to deprive myself of the opportunity of offering it to you. This ring, symbol of an unfortunate alliance, I will cast from mine eyes. Adieu! adieu ! For the last Cute. adieu r Lastly, M. Claveau read a letter, in which Madame Desprez desires that they may not be judicially separated. " No, you shall not, MOM interesting sponse!" exclaimed the Advocate in conclusion ; " this tribunal will condemn you to bc happy with a husband  who contends against you with reluctance, and awaits Ton with inspaimmir Afters reply from aed emober from 4 ll.t Ms rid ttfrl" saimalPed for a week, tolredes srliaff