THE ANGERSTEIN DIVORCE CASE.
| From Oub Special Correspondent. ] London, July K5. is- Aucklanders and Dunedin folk who rosd member “ Captain ” Angerstein and his a doings in New Zealand in 1880 and 10 1881 will scarcely be surprised to learn l3 f that his wife has 'been obliged to divorce ro him. The wonder to me is that the t V poor woman stuck to him so long, Mrs id Angerstein was a Dunedin girl, and, if je I remember rightly, married the soi-dknnl Is captain against her friends’ wishes. The w ceremony took place at St. Paul’s Church, 16 Dunedin, in ISSO, and soon after the newlymarried couple moved to Auckland, and n made an attempt at settling down there. Angerstein’a Bond street clothes and in cigarettes, condescending manners, and tall stories anent the various “smart” lfc people ho hud known at Home, created q quite a sensation in Auckland society, t. and Mrs Angerstein was generally voted ie charming. The “ Captain ” was shepherded it at this time by one of the Mr Mowbrays, who (at the request o: Angerstein f e'rc) endeavored to convert him into a decent 9 > and useful member of society. Mr Mowj. bray soon found his charge a tougbish handr- full. There was always some trouble on. d I forget now the various things that hap■s pened, hut I can just recall one serious 0 betting row with the Ring which “ Mick ” ■* Gallagher managed to compound. Three or ’ four years ago I was astonished to run ! > across Angerstein at a London tiieatro gorgeously arrayed, and in appearance but little changed. I saw Mrs Angerstein in hj Court on Friday afternoon. She seemed ;■* terribly worn and ill, and has lost all trace of her good looks; Angerstein did not g make any attempt to defend the divorce e suit. I thought, indeed, his lawyers appeared rather suspiciously anxious to facilitate matters. Others, too, harbored the same impression, for I heard one barrister o whisper to another after the decision ; “The 0 Queen's Proctor will intervene.” Mrs r Angerstein, I understand, means to return ) to her friends in Now Zealand. The following are the main points of the 3 proceedings :Mr Indorwick, Q.C., ap- " peared for the petitioner, and Mr H. B. Deane for the respondent.—Mr Inderwick * said, in opening the case, that the marriage in this instance was celebrated in Now ■/ Zealand, but he was afraid he should not be 3 able to complete the case that day.—Mrs Angerstein eaid she was the petitioner. She married the respondent in March, ISSO, at St. Paul’s Church, Dunedin, New Zcaj land. Shefirstmethiminthecolony,ofw'hich 3 she was a native, in 1878. There were three ) children, only one of whom survived. They 1 came to England and resided at various ■ places, The general conduct of the respon- * dent was bad. .Ho threatened her, and was [ violent towards her. In October, 18S7, they ' were at Boulogne. There he threw a [ decanter at her.—Mr Justice Butt: What, , threw a decanter at you ?—Yes, rny lord ? Did it hit you ?—Yes, my lord. It struck me in the mouth, and made a had cut,— i Petitioner then continued her evidence. At . Brighton, in Lansdown place, the respondent ' struck her, ami at Linwood House, BourneI mouth, he also treated her with great ’ cruelty. In February this year they were i living in St. James’s place, and he was so ■ violent towards her that her nurse had to * come to her assistance.—Charles Constable, 1 valet to Mr Angerstein, said that in February 1 last he heard screams coming from Mr and Mrs ! Angerstoin’a bedroom. He went towards the room, but he saw Mr Angerstein leaving it. He W’as excited, but he (witness) did , not think he was sober.— Hannah Coulstock, lady’s maid to Mrs Angerstein, said at Bournemouth she had seen bruises on Mrs , Angcrsteiu’s arm, and she had heard screams proceeding from Mrs Angerstcin’a room in St, James’s place.—Emmie Pitzroy said she ■ resided in Regent square. She first met Mr Angerstein at the Alhambra early in the present year. She had seen him that morning in the precincts of the Court. He had visited her at her residence. On one occasion ho came in a brougham. He told her he had left his brougham outside.—Mr Justice Butt: When was that ?—ln the April of the present year. He remained with her half an hour.—Mrs Angerstein was recalled. She said on one occasion she recollected her brougham stopping in Regent square. The respondent got out and went into a house there. He remained in the house about half an hour, and on his return told her he had been to see a gentleman about some money. —Mr Deane said he had not crose-examined the witness, because he did not intend to put the respondent in the witness-box. —Mr Arthur Griffiths, clerk to Messrs Lewis and Lewis, peti- ; tinner’s solicitors, proved the service of the 1 citation, and further eaid that he had seen Mr Angersteiu that morning. Emmie Fitzroy was present at the time, and identified him as the gentleman who had visited her at Regent square.—The documents not being in Court to legally prove the marriage, Mr Justice Butt said they could easily he supplied, and then he would grant a decree itm with costs, and give the petitioner the custody of the child.
Permanent link to this item
THE ANGERSTEIN DIVORCE CASE., Evening Star, Issue 7990, 20 August 1889
THE ANGERSTEIN DIVORCE CASE. Evening Star, Issue 7990, 20 August 1889
Using This Item
Allied Press Ltd is the copyright owner for the Evening Star. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons New Zealand BY-NC-SA licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Allied Press Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.