District Court*Monday next the District Court willconvene in this city. The (locket contains two hundred and thirtv-ninecases in all. Of these ten are for robbery, four for larceny, eight indictments for nuisance, seven for forgery,one for seduction, one f« r bastardy,eight preliminary and twenty fourapplications fur divorce, while thebalance are made up from a: tlons atlaw and general cussedness.The divorce mill will grind rapidlyand the following named matrimonially tied couples will be thrown intothe hopper for feed :Margaret vs C. K. Minim k. Christiana vs Fred Correlius. James vs 1Mary M. Pierce, Lucinda vs J. W. 1Hardesty, W. E. vs L. Jones. C. X. vsCatherine Phillips, Sarah vs S im McClellan, Elizabeth vs John ProsserMary vs John Easterman, Catherine:1vs John M. Deatz, Mary T. vs CharlesPlummer, Clara vs Randolph Bailey, 11E. S. vs S. M. McConnell. Him ice vs 8Mathew Scott, Julia vs Chas. Baiigley. 11Elizabeth vs Geo. Kimes, Elia vs Henry Beaty,Gertrude vs Ilenrv Schmbly,tIda vs Chas. Bricher, S. K. J, vs Win. ! aIT. Hughs, W. W. vs Martha Bowen, e Hulda vs Daniel Fisher,M C. vs Wes- eley Drake, Michael vs Bridget Sutton.As will be seen nineteen out of thetwenty four applications for separa-ovation comes from the female side ofthe house, w iiih* only live petitionsP,Pcome from the husbands. tl