Weekly Mail

I FURNITURE! THE BEST VALUE GIVEN Good, Substantial FURNITURE. WARRANTED TO WEAR. ALL BOUND. HCME-MADE GOODI. TO GET TiltS VISIT THE Atlas Furniture Co., Hayes Buildings, Cardiff. E50,000 WORTH OF STOCK TO SELECT FROM FOR CASH OR ON EAST TERMS. GOODS DELIVERED FREE. CATALOGUES FREE ON APPLICATION I Strongest and Best." ^prjH I -heaztm. Mm r I y V ps" conamtrated y Cocoa I OVer 30b Gold Medals and Diplomat. J

THE POLLARD DIVORCE TRIAL—JUDGMENT.—See Page 7.

StJBMARINE TOWED OFF. ^OLONGED OPERATIONS SAFELY CONCLUDED. x. — -ar weeks and a day of strenuous, ^a.te g labour and anxiety the unfor- submarine A1 was on Monday raised Jta fr 8andy bed. seven fathoms below rfa, at the Nab, where she sank on »f with her crew of eleven officers and °r with the Berwick Castle. the 6*18 of persons put off in small boats v^j.^ot, which, however, was kept clear > £ ice boats. Soon after six o'clock the pro- V*^rd Was aga*n mder weigh, and headed J*<1 the harbour. Intense excitement %y failed throughout the period of ^>re' but, though thousands thronged the S and occupied every coign of 'vantage, "stige of A1 could be seen. At almost t 8 Pace the procession entered the har- fts its way paet the Victory and •' g Inari,ies of the flotilla moored close ship in commission lowered her jo to half-mast, a mute token of respect tOlrc e honoured dead who were being "5 fv home for burial. The dockyard had Sia 8 time been closed for the day, but a forking party had been told off to iate submarine at the deep dock and to for the removal of the bodies of the tliis purpose a special party of • 1°^ been drafted from Haslar ^isf ami e^e^ls w€re in readiness for the er of the bodies to that establishment. QDEST ON THE BODIES OF THE CREW OPENED. A4 Work of docking the Ill-fated submarine tteQ.d removing the bodies occupied the 8eofe* Part of Monday night. Great Vy was observed, nobody except ?ea,r actually engaged being allowed the dock, even naval officers £ kept away. The bodies, which •a,n almost perfect condition, are easily and Alderman Ohurchill him- that of his son placed in a shell and to ■^as^ar Hospital, to await the k^ittak bodies were got out of the sub- •y y men wearing diving suite, laid one '1 8j. 111 shells, and then taken to the Haslar ^"iite lannches. The inside of the sub- *"<ier Was perfectly clean, and a month wa.ter had evidently not injured it. ri, ames of the officers and men who j. in the disaster are as follow:— SdkTt?nant Loftue C. O. Maneergh. leutenant John P. Churchill. Clir,?~room Artificers W. J. Parkinson and Bailey, both of Souths ea. **ttv Fleming, Portsmouth, (j Yi (first class) William Dudgeon, \fn„: Bak«r, Portsmouth; V. W. Roberta, *Se Corn™n- Charw^1 P: S. Wallace, Belfast; and les Nv.- Stoker A Portsmouth. f' Ellis, Devon port. Qquest was opened at Haelar Hospital ■y (before Mr. Edgar.Gabie, ooynty )> Wfio Brtiwt!be outset made some eym- c remarks touching the catastrophe, ven bodies were viewed as they lay in of plain oak, covered with Union Offence was given by Lieutenant Garforth, Majesty's ship Thames, who spoke to £ the crew of the submarine embark on 17. when the bodies were taken out Mansergh was found in the con- h^>Wer* and Sab-lieutenant Churchill at 0^J?ttom of the conning tower. t? 'Ha -*n the next witness, said the rrflne 1vaa enSa8ed in manoeuvres at the the disaster, and he (witness) was in b¡1¡.t of the submarine flotilla. In his 11 if the crew had not been stunned, c°ild have stopped the leak in t tower, blown their ballast tanks, and k th surface- The crew were stunned • collision. Captain Bacon, con- said the optical tube of the £ tor was bent to port, a venti- broken, and the conning tower but the leak was eo small that it if 6aS*ly have been stopped from the in- 1 Hn!'16 crew had not been stunned. None of Nun st tanks were blown. The crew were eN positions they should have been everything was in perfect working jurymen, Captain Bacon said ^^Lj«e submarine was looated bubbles ?Hl. raising to the surface until eleven The submarine had been struck about earlier, at eleven minntes past fory found that the deeeased met their accidentally by drowning. The jury Commended that submarine man- should not be carried out in narrow ,'Y8. hd,, recommendation was subsequently th 8llawn on Captain Bacon pointing out a regulation would be impossible of

LOVER'S LIABILITY, 41i OLD SWEETHEART'S BILL FOR BOARD. ^jj?Uability of a lover for the payment of ^(w^theart's lodgings was the point in a case which was heard at Leeds Coumty- u*fciri1U Wednesday. Mr. Herbert Thompson la 'ham, of Belgrave-square, Leeds, was pwdl<>rd. and his action was brought to lis. for board and lodging, and a enSiQeer aQd ironfounder, named v Gorman Darling, was the defendant, OV'Bra r, 1902. according to Mr. Higgin- Jit1 a woman, who said she was Mrs. k.. --engaged rooms from him at 18s. per £ defendant subsequently visited Paid sums amounting to £ 25 for her by cheque. Later on the discovered .that the woman was not i{J^"ling, but a Miss Kay, and that she rfMn^ituted breach of promise proceedings *41 ^arling. The action was settled. out • and shortly afterwards Darling Miss Kay at half-past one in the i^t ^n(t promised to pay her account. St th° jSe had not fulfilled. Hearing yesterday the defendant tj^8 Ho liability, on the ground that there Ij^^ntract in writing, and because after knew that the woman was not A d was allowed to remain. Hi stato^n<^ant himself went into the box, *tb 'hat he became acquainted with and ehe was his housekeeper 4t ord until she went to plaintiff's rooins. ^hiJ^^de "thought so much of her that Hv^Ute] a will leaving everything to her afterwards he parted from her V> ^cem her extravagance, but told her to jw; for a » rooms, and he would look after weeks. She brought a breach of VvMie^vja^ti°n against him, which he com- L,y Paying £ 75, instead of the £ 1,000 °tt claimed. He had taken her to ^th him, and they had occupied r and Mre" Smith. reenhow found that the defendant th exprees authority to the woman to and gave judgment for the ■ With costs. ===--

DESERTED HIS WIFE. ^cedS Police-court the Stipendiary chn-r' •"orsan Thomas, so well-known ^hie <leair.lrinaD .of t-he Pontypridd Rocking- stBltration during the great colliery Ma iHg ch to 0116 month's imprisonment, k^ife n«jrg6d on a warrant with deserting C- Ack r family- the warrant officer of the •ifti 9 faTv„-i ,rdian8, that defen- sincA w ^,een chargeable to the »aid ^ebruary, 1902, and £ 17 lis. had j ? 'he rates by way of relief, tfa been all over the country, and Hii he him lost until last Wednesday, J!romi)tllr Placed under arrest on L ^warance at Pontypridd.

"ROARING TIME AND A GREAT SPREE." DIVORCE ACTION AGAINST A DOCTOR. In the Divorce Court Mrs. Amy Frances Hart, living at Brighton, formerly of Wansford, Northamptonshire, sued for a divorce from her husband, Dr. Francis John Lorrimore Hart, against whom she alleged cruelty and misconduct, which he denied. Petitioner, in her evidence, said her hus- band once said that during her absence from him he had had a roaring time and a great spree. He subsequently became ill. After they had been separated she received a letter from her husband, in which he said:— I am unable to exprees myself fully, but I can only say that without you near me I cannot live or go back to Sydenham." He further asked her to forgive and forget, rnd return to him, so that he could have a ibance of- Pouring into your ears the words of a true 10"J'er, and getting back little by little ,the love of your heart which has been chilled. I CeWl only account for the present awful trouble between us and the excesses to which I have resorted only as a useless and despe- rate attempt to cover the heart pangs which resulted from your growing coldness and a cruel attempt to extort your love instead of nourishing it. Oh, come back to me before it is too late. To that letter she replied that it was impos- sible for her to return to him. In cross-examination by Mr. Barnard, who appeared for the respondent, petitioner said that she ceased cohabitation with her hus- band about 1895, two years after the child was born, and it was shortly after that she DB. HART. I noticed the respondent took to drinking. She admitted that one letter had been sent to a Miss Riddell, from a gentleman. which was for witness, but she denied that there were numerous letters addressed to Miss Riddell for her. She was not a jealous woman, and she had never suggested that her husband had committed misconduct with any of his lady patients. Miss Riddell gave evidence as to the alleged cruelty, and Dr. Harvey, of Peckham. brother- in-law of the petitioner, was then called. He said Mrs. Hart spoke to him complaining of her husband getting drunk, swearing at her, and so forth. Mr. Barnard, on behalf of the respondent, submitted that the evkfenoe against his elient was practioally nil. The trouble between the petitioner and the resoondent arose purely and simply from Mrs Hart's conduct with a gentleman whose acquaintance she had made, and with whom she had carried on a secret correspondence. The respondent was called, and said that after the birth of the child his wife had a serious attack of rheumatic fever, and was in a very delicate state of health. He denied that he was a violent man, or that he had called her the foul names that had been alleged. It was possible that he called his wife a cold-blooded sphinx." That term would describe her character. The respondent was under cross-examina- tion when the court adjourned till Tuesday. When the case was resumed on Tuesday, the respondent again entered the box, and was further cross-examined by Mr. Pike. He said that he told Miss Riddell, a lady com- panion, that he intended to get to the bottom of Dr. Stephens's visits to his house. He had not dictated a statement to Miss Riddell, and, he had not threatened that lady. Miss Riddell had threatened to poison herself, but he did not threaten to give her in charge because she had done so. He knew there was some- thing between his wife and Miss Riddell. Did you say that she "bached up" Mrs. MRS. HART. TTart?—I might have said something to indi- S* that she was supporting Mrs. Hart Did you say she was backing up the losing P Witness, continuing, said that, though he was convinced in his own mind as to his wife's guilt, he was advised that there was not sum- cient evidence to justify him in entering a cross petition. Did you make charges against your wife m order to bring her to Jier knees?-You Can put it that way if you like. Witness, continuing, denied that he had been guilty of acts of violence towards his wife. She had frightfully exaggerated the real state of the facts. You were annoyed at the charges she made against you, and at her sending for Dr. Harvey?-I was annoyed. After Dr. Harvey had gone did you say you would make her suffer for it until her dying day, and that you would break her spirit?— No. Did you ever threaten to shut her up as a lunatic?—No. That is not true. Or that you would bring another woman into the house?—No. Had you a mistress?—No. You had said your wife was a cold-blooded woman?-She was latterly. And you were warm-blooded?—I am natu- rally of a very kind nature, but when crossed I suppose I get peppery. Did you ever, in order to arose her jealousy, tell her you had misconducted yourself with other women?—No. What was the roaring time you had been having when she was away?—Nothing in par- ticular. j And that is all you can say?—Yes. Were you at all ill after this roaring spree? —Not at all. Then what she said is invented?—Her whole story is an invention. Servants who had been in the employ of the respondent gave evidence as to the character of Dr. Hart. In effect they said that the respondent was a kind husband, and that he did not drink or swear. Mr. Barnard then addressed the jury on behalf of Dr. Hart. After counsel had concluded their speeches, his Lordship summed up. After an absenoe of. ten minutes the jury found that the respondent had committed misconduct and cruelty. His Lordship granted a decree nisi with eosts and the custody of ffie chfldWM.

HUSBAND FORMS ANOTHER ATTACHMENT. Mrs. Ann Hall in the Divorce Court sought a divorce by reason of the desertion and mis- conduct of her husband, Mr. Henry James Hall, stated to be the proprietor of a patent tonio wine. There was no defence. Mr. Deane, K.C., with whom was Mr. Bar- na.rd, who appeared for the petitioner, that the parties were married on May 21, 1884, at the Registry-office, Mile-end, and there were five childrer. They lived together down to 1892 at Ilford, Essex, when the respondent told his wife that he could not afford to keep her any longer in England. He took her and the children to Geneva, where he left them. From time to time he paid her "flying visits," and after this went on for four years Mrs. Hall wanted to come back to this country. He would not hear of this, and arranged that she should go to Berlin. In April, 1900, she told her husband that the real reason for his keeping away from her was that he had formed another attachment. In November, 1900, she came to England, and iaaed him with living with another woman. He replied, "All I have got to say is that you have to prove it." She consulted her solicitors, and eventually a separation deed was agreed to, it being covenanted that the wife should have E700, increasing to £1,000 a year, and that she should have the custody of the children. She came to this country, and took up her abode at Ilford. Her husband had an office at Thames-chambers, Adelphi, and the children used to visit him. On one of the occasions one of the daughters saw a letter lying on her father's desk, which was to the effect that the writer, "Mrs. Hall," wanted to pay certain bills. The daughter told her mother about this, and the petitioner at once guessed that there was another Mrs. Hall." Inquiries were subsequently made at Bangor, and it was found that in May and September, 1903, the respondent had lived with a person other than the petitioner, that she had made his acquaintance many years ago, and that a child had been born who was now ten years of age. Evidence having been given in support of counsel's statement, Mr. Justice Barnes asked how the deed of separation affected the desertion. Mr. Deane submitted that at the time the deed was executed the petitioner did not know of her husband's misconduct. It was from the first Mr. Hall's intention to desert his wife, and lead this "double life." The peti- tioner alleged that the desertion commenced from 1892. Mr. Justice Barnes granted a decree nisi, with costs, and custody of the children.

ALLEGATIONS AGAINST AN ABER» GAVENNY MAN. In the Divorce Division "of the High Court of Justice on Monday, before Mr. Justice Barnes, the case of Delafield v. Delafield came on for hearing. This was a suit of Mrs. Mary Hove Delafield, nee Clarke, for a dissolution of her marriage with Mr. Edgar James Dela4 field, formerly of Abergavenny, on the ground of his alleged desertion and misconduct. The suit was undefended. Mr. Jarvis, who appeared for the petitioner, said the marriage took place on the 4th of April, 1888. at the Congregational Chapel, Abergavenny, and there were four children issue of the marriage. The respondent was charged with misconduct with a woman who was unknown. Petitioner and respondent separated "tender a dteed iti November, 1898, and the El a week. In 1900 the respondent had One off to the tJnited States, where it was alleged misconduct had taken place. His Lordship: If they were separated under a deed, where is your authority for saying there was desertion? Mr. Jarvis: He has never paid her any money. His Lordship: That does not matter. If they were living apart under a deed, how can there be desertion? Mr. Jarvis cited the case of Gatehouse v. Gatehouse, to show that desertion began, not when the cohabitation ceased, but when the husband made up his mind to abandon his wife and take up with another woman. Counsel said the respondent's father was a brewer at Abergavenny Respondent had, when on a visit to this country, admitted misconduct with a woman in America. His Lordship said he could not hold that the case cited was an authority for saying there had Peen desertion. In another case it had been held that the execution of a separation deed by a wife was inconsistent with a charge of desertion. Mr. Jarvis said he was informed that there was an allegation of cruelty at an earlier date, but it was not alleged in the petition. He asked leave to amend the petition to include that allegation. His Lordship assented to the case standing over eo that the petition might be amended accordingly.

DIVORCE PETITIONER'S PATHETIC LETTER. A pathetic letter was read in the Divorce Court when Mrs. Josephine Margaret Graydon asked for a divorce from her husband, Dr. Archibald Graydon. The marriage took place secretly in 1892, when Dr. Graydon was living with his mother in Bayswater. A girl was born in the following year, and then the doctor refused to see his wife any more. In 1900, when Mrs. Graydon was living at Wor- cester, she wrote him the following letter:— Dear Archie,—I am sorry to trouble you, but feel I must do so. Ever since I came to Worcester I have been made very miserable by people making remarks about my being alone, and no one ever sees my husband; but lately things have been very much worse, and as our poor little Mary grows older they will still be so( If you would only have come and seen Mary now and then it would have made things better for her, but when her little school friends ask her when last she saw her father, and she tells them she has never seen him yet, it looks at least strange, and one person refused to allow her little girl to go out with Mary to tea, as she did not think her mother was married, or the father would be seen some- times. Are things to go for ever like they are doing, Archie? Had I been a bad woman I could not have more to bear. Won't you see your little child sometimes? She is a sweet little creature. I don't ask you to give me any love. I have lived with- out it from you for seven years now, Archie—ever since God gave me my little girl; and, after all, there is no love so true as a little child's. Her husband never came to see the child, said Mrs. Graydon, and last year he wrote that he was going abroad, and gave the address of a Miss O'Neill. Inquiries resulted in the petition being filed. A decree nisi was granted.

A ROMANTIC MARRIAGE. Lady Constance Mackenzie was married in the little Episcopal Chapel at Tain to Sir Edward Austin Stewart Richard-j son, Bart., of Pitfour, Perthshire. The engagement only became known recently, and many of the guests to the wedding were invited by telegram. The sister of Lady Constance, the Countess of Cromartie, is at present in Italy, and although the ceremony took place within view of Dunrobin Castle, none of the-bride's latives associated with the ducal home of the Sutherlands were present. Lady Constance, who is in her twenty-third year, delights in outdoor amusements. She is an excellent horsewoman and a crack shot. A champion swimmer, she held for two or three years the Bath Club Challenge Shield. Recently she travelled round the world, pay- ing a visit to Somaliland, and going some distance inland, habited in an unconventional costume, which included a cowboy's hat. When forbidden to proceed further she returned in the Admiral's ship to Aden, and thence went to Bombay on a shooting expedi- tion. Her ladyship is heiress presumptive to the Countess of Cromartie, one of the largest lady landowners in the three kingdoms. The earldom of Cromartie lapsed on account of the family's oonneotion with the '45 rebellion, but the title was bestowed on their grand- mother, the late Duchess of Sutherland, by Queen Victoria. LUCKY AND UNLUCKY ONES. JUDGE (Mr. Austen Chamberlain): Those I let off; but I shall inflict fines on all the rest.

A SON-IN-LAW'S LIBEL ACTION. Mr. Justice Lawrance and a special jury, in the King's Bench Division. resumed the hearing of the action brought by Caleb Henry Foxwell against his mother-in-law, Mrs. Shafto-Grene, for damages for alleged libel. In letters written by her she described the plain- tiff as a* weak, lying poltroon, and stated that her money was all he wanted when he married her daughter. The defendant pleaded privilege and justification- The plaintiff was further cross-examined by Mr. Lawson Walton, K.C.. and admitted that at the time his wife was expecting to be con- fined he had no income and no home to take her to. He didn't suggest that under these circumstances it would have been prudent for, Mrs. Shafto-Grene to send b#r daughter away from the shelter of- ier roof. His object in starting this section was MR. FOXWUX. I not to get money from the defendant, but to get his wife back. His mother- in-law had taken his means of living away from him by publishing the libels. He wrote to his wife when she proposed to go back to him that while this case was pending they had better live apart. Did you mean that until the action against her mother had come to an end you would not live with her?-No; but I thought we had better be apart. His wife had accused him of making his wicked law action against her mother an excuse for evading his respon- sibility to his wife and child. Your wife wae anxious to come back. Why did you not write and teU her to come?—I had no home to take her to. Why did you not write and ten her eo?—She knew it. Major Grene, his wife's father, witness con- tinued, offered to provide a home for them out of his income if he would take her back, and made it a condition that this action should be dropped. He accepted the offer, but refused to drop the action. He told the major why he had brought the action, but did not MRS. FOXWELL. I slander Mrs. Shafto-Grene. He might have said that her conduct was unbecoming for a married woman. What possible right had you to try to poison his mind against his wife ?—I stated facts as clearly as I could. Why?—I cannot tell why. What did y<)u, mean to suggest by stating that she was frequently out cycling with a gentleman ?-I did not suggest anything. with posing as a widow. She was with posing as a iwdow. She aws a member of the Pioneer Club, a high social club for ladies. Asked who sent a cer- tain scandalous postcard to that lady at her club, he denied that it was he, and guessed that it was an intinate friend of his whom he first met at Dove • Do you really moan to tell the jury that that gross insult was volunteered by a man—a respectable man, I snppose, and who you say [was a purser on oie of the boats in the Channel Service—at his o^n unaided instance?—I can fonly give a guess that he did so. His friend, witness added, denied that he had sent the postcard. The postcard stated, Yonr husband is alive and well." This concluded the cross-examination of the plaintiff. Re-examined, witness stated that his grand- father died recently leaving £ 45,000, and witness was a beneficiary under the will, but owing to the libels a codicil was added depriv- ing him of any share of the estate. Up to the time of the libels he had not written one word reflecting upon the defendant, and he was prompted to make the reflections by the loss of his wife. On one occasion his sister- in-law told him to go and drown himself, and he replied, Certainly, anything to oblige you." He was never drunk in his life. Witness, before leaving the box, said he was sorry for the reflections he had made on Mrs. Shafto-Grene. He was nearly mad when he made them, because he had lost his wife. An expert in writing gave it as his opinion that the telegram, Shall split on you, scoundrel.—Julie Smith," which the defendant denied having sent, was written by Mrs. Shafto-Grene. Miss Julie Smith said she had known the plaintiff since he was a little boy, and there was always an understanding between him and her. In 1901 the understanding came to an end. She denied having sent the telegram to which her name was attached. fljaafregaminefl: For a long time the •■UHkr' H&l been going anyhow* wrote to plaintiff to see how the etood. He then wrote asking to be released. She thought perhaps it was not over, and sent him a rose on St. George's Day, but got no reply. His Lordship: Then all hope was over? (Laughter.) Witness: I thought it might be made up, but it did not trouble me much. (Laughter.) Miss Mand Sparkes said about six years ago she was engaged to plaintiff, but his feelings changed, and she broke it off, but they re- mained friends. Plaintiff's wife called on her and asked her if she knew anything detri- mental to his character. Iiiis. Foxwell"thought it would be rather fun to send him a tele- gram signed Julie Smith," to frighten him, and witness thought it would be rather fun, too. Cross-examined: She was engaged to the plaintiff without her parents' consent. She had signed a statement to the effect that plaintiff knew perfectly well that her father was a rich man, and that if she got married without his consent she would get nothing. In that declaration she had also said that she suggested they should get married without the consent of her parents, and he declined, in consequence of which she concluded that he was afraid she would get no allowanoe or settlement from her father. Witness said she meant all this at the time, because she was then on the side of Mrs. Shaftc-Grene, but now she was on the other aide. (Laughter.) It was only true to a oer- tain extent. They did not drift apart until long after plaintiff knew that her father would not consent to the marriage. After he went to Ireland he became a very indifferent sort of lover, and she was sick of the whole thing. (Laughter.) In her interview with Mrs. Foxwell she said: "Perhaps he only wanted me for my money," but she did not think so now. She had written to Mrs. Foxwell withdrawing the statement, and gave it to the plaintiff to post. Mr. Herbert Goldingham, a Gloucester solicitor, stated that plaintiff's grandfather died worth 141,000, Witness, at the request of defendant's solicitor, showed the old gentle- man the pleadings in this action, with the result that the will was altered, and plaintiff was deprived of about Mrs. Foxwell, plaintiff's mother, said that her son was an exemplary young man, and the libels had Aocked and distressed her very much until she discovered they were without foundation. The hearing was adjourned until Monday.

DRAMATIC END OF THE ACTION. The hearing was resumed on Monday in Mr. Justice Lawrance's court. w iui iiki evidence of Miss Ford, his aunt, that she had dffered a home to his wife after he had given up his situation at Clonmel, his case was closed, and Mr. Lawson Walton, K.C., opened the defence. Mrs. Vera Foxwell, wife of the plaintiff, and now 23 years of age, gave evidence as to the acquaintance which led to the marriage, and stated that plaintiff told her he had a Govern- ment appointment, that he expected to enter the Army, and that his grandfather, whose heir he was, was very wealthy, and lived upon a large estate in Gloucestershire. She was never able, prior to her marriage, to obtain my definite information as to his position, and thought he was very much younger than he was. She never had any intention of marrying in a clandestine fashion, but was induced to do so, as he seemed so unhappy and because she thought there might be a row, as her mother said she would write to her father in oonsequence of the correspondence that was going on. It was owing to that she wired to plaintiff, "Father on the warpath. Come at once." He came, and they got married at the registrar's office at Ports- mouth. Plaintiff refused to stop and face her mother, and immediately returned to Ireland. Someone else, however, came on the scene and began to make love to her, so she had to inform her mother that she was married. The plaintiff had requested her to keep the marriage secret. When she went to Clonmel with her husband she had to live in two rooms, which was not at all what she ex- pected. Her husband had taken charge of M her mother gave her, and she had had only a few pounds of it back. He also refused to allow her any housekeeping money. saying, "Let the tradesmen give us credit as long as they will trust us." Plaintiff also objected to her money being settled on her, and stated that he could treble it. She replied that that would be very nice, but that she did not understand it. Mr. Stewart objected to the witness giving seoondary evidence about a letter which had been destroyed, and which, according to the particulars of the defence, was a letter the defendant intended to produce and rely upon. Mr. Justice Lawranoe said he would admit the evidence. Mr. Stewaxt: But I rely upon the raW of evidence. Mr. Justice lawranoe: Very well; 3Nm opon them, and I will break them. Mr. Stewart: Will your lordship make a note of the objection? Mr. Justice Lawrance: No; make you own note. (Laughter.) Witness said that she sent the telegram signed Julie Smith" to her husband as a joke. She spent Christmas with her mother, and when she returned to Clonmel his behaviour to her was perfectly horrid. He treated her like a dog, and was just as nasty as he could possibly be. On one occasion he threatened to drown himself, and as he did not come home to his meals she was greatly upset. She asked a neighbour to look for him, and be was found drinking at his club. He told her he would make her life a hell, and kill her mother and all her relations. When the tradesmen refused to give credit any longer she had to use her own money for house- keeping. Why do you not go back to your husband ?— Because he won't have me. Not even with £100 a year?—No. Cross-examined: She did not expect her husband to keep her in luxury, but thought he had enough to keep her on. You think he was a fortune-hunter who married you for ypur money f I cannot see what else I can think. She had MISS JULIE SMITH — never received a letter from the plaintiff stating that he was not in a position to marry. You are a young lady of pretty acute intel- lect, not likely to be imposed upon?—I do not know. You were writing him to come and marry me; I oannot live without you," and that sort of thing?—Oh, that is only a kind of way of writing.. (Laughter.) Mr. Stewart proceeded to read the witness's letters, when she burst out crying, and said she thought it was awfully mean to read her love letters like this in oourt. Her lettere had nothing to do with her mother's libel case, she protested. Mr. Stewart said that tears were a woman's refuge, but he must read the letters to show that the plaintiff had not forced witness into a secret marriage. Mr. Justice Lawrance: Well, go on. (To wit- ness) Try and answer calmly. You have been through a lot before this. Witness: I won't have my letters read out. I won't stay. Mrs. Foxwell then rushed out of the witness- box and out of the court. The jury, after asking his lordship's direc- I' I MBS. SHAPTO-GBENB. tion with respect to the Julie Smith tele- gram, intimated that they had heard enough of the case, and were prepared to return a verdict for the defendant. Mr. Stewart objected to this intimation, and insisted that the jury should hear the case' out. Mr. Justice Lawrence: They have heard the whole of your case, and if you want to argue it you must go elsewhere. Mr. Stewart: They have only heard part of the letters, and I claim the right to address them. Mr. Justice Lawrence: You may address them. but I shall not be here when the address takes place. It is ridiculous non- sense, and you must have known it long ago. Mr. Stewart: I know nothing of the kind, and it is possible that the jury might modify the view they have prematurely expressed. Mr. Justice Lawrence: Premature they have not been. I only wonder they did not stop it long ago. The Foreman: We should have done so on the first evening, bat oould not quite acree. Mr. Justice Lawrenoe; Judgment for the defendant. i

SERIES OF TRAGIC INCIDENTS. A TRAGIC AFFAIR AT BLACK- WOOD. At Blackwood on Wednesday night some Volunteers were engaged in target practice at the institute. They were using the Morris tube, an instrument which fits into the rifle, to teach rec-uits how to aim. Whilst thus engaged one of the guns was found to have something the matter with it and while a sergeant was seeking to remove the obstacle the gun went off, and the charge struck a young- man, named Henry Ambrose 'Jennings, living at Argoed. Medioal aid was promptly procured, and it was found that the bullet had penetrated the lungs. The injured man was removed to his home at Argoed, and it was feared that fatal results would quickly follow, but on Thursday Dr. Evans. of Blackwood, found his patient better. He has partly recovered from the shock. The bullet has not yet been extracted. It entered the body a little above the heart, and passed through the lungs. MANORDILO FARMER'S FATE. Mr. Martin Richards, of Llanelly, deputy- coroner for the South-eastern District of Car- marthenshire, held an inquest at the Llan- dilo Union Workhouse on Wednesday after- noon, touching the death of Thomas Thomas. the Manordilo farmer who had been missing from his home since the 19th of February last, and whose body was on Tuesday found in the River Towy.—John Evans, of Llwynybrain, brother-in-law of the deceased, identified the body, and said that he last saw Thomas Thomas alive on the night of the 19th of Feb- ruary at the Square and Compass Inn, near Llangadock. He had had some drink, but he was not very drunk. He saw him leave the Square and Compass in company with one Morgan Morgan. He was 50 years of age, and was a prosperous farmer. He was in no difficulty of any kind.—The jury returned a verdict of "Accidental death from drowning." WOMAN'S BODY IN A TANK. Mr. Price, the Pembrokeshire county coroner, held an inquest at the Queen's Hotel, Pembroke Dock, on Saturday, on the body of Maria Thomas, single woman, who resided at 26, Queen-street. Six weeks ago she dis- appeared from her home, and a constable searched in a tank in the backyard of her father's house, but without finding anything. On the 15th inst., however, a plumber was called in to clear away an obstruction in the tank, and he found the body of the massing woman. Dr. R. H. Williams said he found no marks of violence, and she had evidently been dead some weeks. A verdict of "Found drowned was returned. A PEMBROKESHIRE BEACH DIS- COVERY. A headless body. in a state of decomposi- tion, and with absolutely nothing to identify 'i ,iliitJ:t'r9¡'o"j- opposite ot gaftrda-y. On March 28 a young Ramsgate fisherman, employed on a fishing smack at Milford, fell overboard while lighting the ship's sidelights off St. Ann's Head, and was not recovered. and it is thought probable that the body washed ashore at Angle might be his. SUICIDE AT TREHARRIS. What appears to have been a determined act of suicide was committed by a man named Jarrold, of Susannah-place, Treharris, oiL Sunday morning, about one o'clook. He drank about 8oz. of carbolic acid, after which he called his wife and children around him, and wished them good-bye. He died about four hours later. Deceased was a man who had been in very good circumstances, having been a farmer and corn dealer in a large way of business in Herefordshire. BOY DROWNED AT BRITON FERRY. A lad, named Herbert John Thomas, between three and four years of age, son of Mr. John Thomas, 33, Neath-road, Briton Ferry, went for a walk on Baglan-road, and entered an opening in the wall just opposite the old Vernon Pond, where he fell on his head. His brother and a young lad called Winstone were in his company. WREXHAM LADY TAKES POISON. Quite a sensation was caused in Wrexham on Wednesday when it became known that Mrs. Holmes, wife of Mr. C. T. Holmes, assis- tant to Mr. W. J. Fletcher, M.R.C.V.S., had como mitted suicide by taking prussic acid. The deceased was apparently in her usual health, and there was nothing to suggest that she was likely to take her life. She was 32 years old. DISCOVERY AT SWANSEA. The dead body of a furnaceman, named Michael Sullivan, of 25, Charlee-etreet, Swan- sea, was found early on Saturday morning lying on a piece of waste land in Prince of Wales-road. A verdict of "Death from natural causes" was returned at the inquest. DIED ON THE ROAD. The circumstances of a sudden death wen reported to Mr. Price, the Pembrokeshire county ooroner, on Saturday, Thomas Gwil. liam, who was 31 years of age, having been found dead on the Barracks Hill, Pembroke Dock. As he had been under medical attea- dance, and the doctor was able to certify that death had resulted from heart failure. no inquest was necessary. SUDDEN DEATH AT BARRY. Mr. John Taylor, aged 49, a coaltrimmer, of 44, Wyndham-etreet, Barry Dock, went to work apparently in the beet of health on Monday night. About four o'clock in the morning he was suddenly seized with a fit, and was removed to his homift, where he died shortly after six tm.

"DISAPPEARANCE OF A CARDIGAN TRADESMAN." Last veek a paragraph appeared in the "Weekly Mail" to the effect that Mr. William Watts, builder and contractor, Cardigan, had been missing from that town for several days, and had left a wife and family behind him. From inquiries we have made it transpires that, although Mr. Watts was away from Car- digan for three or four days, the time waa spent in transacting legal business at Cardiff, and that Mrs. Watts knew where he had gone. If the paragraph has caused Mr. and Mrs. Watts any annoyance we sincerely regret it, and take the first opportunity of publishing an explanation.

"MUCH TOO PRETTY." A LATY AND HER MINIATURE PAINTING. In the King's Bench on Wednesday Mrs. Amaha Kusener Coudert sued Mrs. Ada Wat- uey, wife of Mr. Claude Watney, the well. known brewer, to recover 200 guineas, balance A an alleged agreed sum of 400 guineas for a miniature painting of the defendant.Coun. sel said the plaintiff began her career as a miniature painter in the United States, and coming to England, bad achieved considerable repute. She had painted the King, the Emperor of Russia, and -any other distin- guished persons. Mrs. Watney now denied that 400 guineas was the agreed price, though when she sent 200 guineas to the plaintiff the receipt read, Received R,210, on acoount of JE420 for miniature." and this receipt defen- dant seemed to accept. There was no com- plaint of the picture, as defendant wrote, "All my friends like it very much, but I want you to alter the mouth and chin, which are much too pretty for mine." Mrs. Watney said that plaintiff told her that her price ranged from a hundred to three hundred guinea4. but for crowned heads she got 500 guineas. The jury were unable to mtxm. sad W" die changed.