Stockton Herald, South Durham and Cleveland Advertiser. — 1888-07-14 (Stockton-on-Tees, Cleveland, England)

DAMAGES AGAINST A SOLICITOR. In the Divorce Division on Wednesday Sir Jas. Hannen and a special jury had before them the case of Irwin r. Irwin and Layard. The petition was that of the husband, a retired Irish tax collector, and the co-respondent was Mr John Granville Layard, a London solicitor. In opening the case Mr Lockwood said the petitioner was formerly a surveyor of taxes in Ireland, and at the time he first became acquainted with the respondent he had retired from his position as surveyor, and was living in England upon his pension, which he had received from the Government, amounting to about £l9O a year. The respondent was the daughter of a gentleman of position in Trinity College, Dublin, and they were married in October, 1883. She represented that she and her mother were very much reduced in circumstances, and although the daughter of a professor of mathematics she had been obliged to act as barmaid. She was of considerable personal attractions, and between 20 and 30 years younger than her husband. In regard to his monetary affairs the co.respondent was called in for advice, and was a frequent visitor at the house. He had one child, of whom he was very fond. Mr Irwin had been in the habit of taking sleeping draughts. Upon one occasion he took one of these draughts and immediately become unconscious, after which the learned counsel went on to allege the petitioner was taken to a pauper lunatic asylum, it being suggested that he intended to commit suicide. On the following day he was brought before the magistrates and discharged. Subsequently he was arrested on a charge of attempting to commit an injury upon lllrs Irwin, and he was afterwards confined in s. lunatic asylum. After he came out he found a number of letters in hie wife's wardrobe in the co-respondent's handwriting. Up to that time he had not the least suspicion of anything wrong on the part of his wife, still lees that she had carried on an intimacy with Ws legal adviser, a married man of good position in his profession. Mr Inderwicklliere intimated that the adultery was not denied, and no further letters were read.  Mr Arthur Valentine Irwin, the petitioner, was called, and bore out the opening statement of counsel. In cross-examination he said that before his marriage he had the misfortune to be confined in an asylum at Camberwell, and was there for fifteen months. There was no justification for this confinement. Before marriage he informed his wile of this circumstance. He denied that he ever treated his wife with cruelty. He was released from the asylum after being seen by two magistrates. To the best of his belief his wife gave him some chlorodyne instead of a sleeping draught. Mr Lockwood, Q.C., then addressed the jury on behalf of Mr Irwin.  Mr Layard, the co-respondent, was called, and denied that he ever had anything to do with putting the petitioner in a lunatic asylum. Mrs Eorah Stephen Irwin, the respondent, said that prior to the marriage she was not aware that her husband had been in an asylum. He told her he had a pension of £5OO a year. He was cruel in his conduct towards her, and frequently struck her. He had pricked the child with pins two or three mouths after its birth, and when abroad he put it in a cupboard. She denied that she ever injected morphia into his system. After an absence of a quarter of an hour the jury found for the petitioner. and assessed the damages at £750. His lordship granted a decnee 1,/ 4, with costs and cu.,:totiv of the eon.  A