THE CAREW DIVORCE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXI, Issue 9401, 6 January 1894, Page 2 (Supplement)

THE CAREW DIVORCE.

A SENSATIONAL CASE. Thb cam of Carew v. - Oarew (Queen's Proctor showing cause) again came before Mr. Justice Barnes and a special jury in the divorce division, on Friday, Nor. 24. Originally this was the petition of the wife, better known, as Miss Edith Chester, the actress, for the dissolution of the marriage on the ground*of the cruelty and adultery of her husband, Mr. Frank Murray Maxwell Carew, a bill broker. The case, which was undefended, was heard on Feb. 8,1892, and a decree nisi was granted. The Queen's Proctor now intervened to prevenb the i decree being made absolute, alleging that it had boon obtained contrary to the justice of the case by withholding material facts from the knowledge of the court, and . that there bad been collusion and condonation, which Mrs. Carew denied. Mr. Alfred John 2Sorris, solicitor, said that he had acted for respondent in his feneral affairs, and was often at Albany lansions from 1891 to 1892, where he had | seen Mrs. Carew. On January 30 last year Mrs. Carew entered the room crying, and said that she had bean insulted by Mr. Brandon Thomas. When Mr, Carew was subsequently charged with assaulting Mr. Brandon Thomas, his wife drove up in a cab and went into the gaoler's room. Husband and wife seamed always on very j friendly terms ; he bad seen them, kissing. Witness added that Mr. Carew was now, living in Scotland. He believed Mrs. | Seymour was living with him. Mr. Lock- i wood (for the petitioner); la he afraid of Mrs. Seymour? Witness; I think he can take care of himself. Is he afraid of her? He is infatuated with her, but not afraid of her'. Lady Lucy Douglas, widow of Lord James Douglas, said she knew the parties to the suit. They always appeared very friendly. . Mrs. Carew called him " Frank, dear," and ho called her "Edith." She had heard Mrs. Carew say she loved her husband very much, and that she would forgive him if he would give up Mrs Seymour. That conversation took place in July, 1891, and she thought she was anxious Carew should give up Mm Seymour, in order to prevent, the scandal of a divorce. Till: FIOHT AT THE COURT THEATRE. John Freeman, fireman ab the Court Theatre, said that Miss Chester acted there in the triple bill in September, 1891. One Saturday night after the performance ho recollected seeing Mrs. Carew talking to Mr. Carew, but he did not hear auy conversation between them. Later on he saw Mr. Brandon Thomas. Witness heard a scuffle. He opened the door, and Brandon Thomas fell into witness' arms. Mr. Carew told him to go away, aa it was only a family brawl. (Laughter.) Mrs. Carow, mother of the respondent, said that if her son would have given up Mrs. Seymour she was sure his wife would have forgiven him. Witness was still on friendly terms with the petitioner, and believed that all the time the parties lived together she was a dutiful wife. Mr. Frank Carew was then called, but did not respond. Mr. Morris, his solicitor, said that he had seen him the previous day, and told him that he would be most likely wanted that morning. Mr. Justice Barnes: Did he make any communication to you? Yes, my lord. He led me to believe he was going to the railway station. (Laughter.) The case for the Queen's Proctor closed after evidence on four allegations against Mrs. Carew of mis conduct with Mr. Loftus Earle on board a houseboat, Ye Mary, at Moulsey, in June last. The evidence of servants was to the effect that Mrs. Carew slept on board one night with other ladies, and that she had been seen subsequently sitting in the same chair as Mr. Earle. THE CASE FOB MRS. CAREW. Mr. Lock wood, Q.C., then opened the case for Mrs. Carew, and emphatically condemned the attack that had been made by the Queen's Proctor on the honour, virtue, and reputation of his client on evidence that did nothing to justify the allegation. The learned counsel said that the evidence only went to show that the husband bad stopped at nothing to place his wife in a compromising position, and then to send the information to the Queen's Proctor. The lady who dined with Mr. Carew and- his friends at the Criterion on the night the decree nisi was obtained was Mrs. Seymour, who had done all in her power to imitate the dress and the mode of dressing her hair of Mrs. Carew. They had had the evidence of the mother of Mr. Carew, who said that the petitioner was a dutiful wife and an affectionate mother; and the great importance of that testimony he felt sure would be fully appreciated by the jury. The evidence to show misconduct on board the houseboat was too ridiculous, and the ooly thing surprising was that the charge had ever been made. Mr. Carew was then called on his subpoena, and did not appear. EVIDENCE OF MRS. CAREW. Mrs. Edith Morgan Carew, examined by Mr. Lock wood, Q.C., said she was married to Mr. Carew in 1887. She first suffered ill-treatment from her husband six months after marriage. He pushed her down and struck her. The blows left marks on her. The cruelty recurred after. He continued to neglect her. She first discovered Mr. Carew was leaving her for the company of other women in 1890, and she then separated from him. She was willing, if Mr. Carew would give up Mrs. Seymour, to return to him, as she was anxions to avoid a scandal. She had taken the children to Albany Mansions at Mr. Carew's request. At a subsequent interview she asked him to give up Mrs. Seymour. Mr. Carew and his partner were present. They were both against her. From matters that then occurred she cried and then left the room, threw herself on a bed, and was seen there by Mr. Carew's valet. She had then her walking costume on. Mr. Carew used to come to her residence, but she had given orders that he was not to be admitted. AFTER THE DIVORCE. It was nob true that after the divorce she dined with her husband. She went home to her rooms, took dinner, and ultimately went to bed, never going out again that night. She was aware that Mr. Carew was tracking her. He told her thab he would give up Mrs. Seymour if the decree was not made absolute. When he came to her residence one night he asked her if she could give him a bed, as Mrs. Seymour had attacked him, and he was afraid to go home. A bed was eventually prepared. A cup of tea was taken to Ml'. Carew in the morning, and he left the bouse without her seeing him. . Mr. Justice Barnes; And you slept in your own bedroom that night 1 Mrs. Carew : Yes, my lord. Continuing, Mrs. Carew said that her husband asked her nob to make the decree absolute. He said ha would not have it done. Mr. Lockwood : And why ? Witness : Because he said he would have to marry Mrs. Seymour, and then he would come p.nd shoot himself at my door. It was not true that when she brought flowers one day when Mr. Carew was out of town she said it was in commemoration of their wedding day. THE NEW CHARGES. ' Since the decree nisi, she would solemnly swear that she had not cohabited with her husband. She first heard of the charges of adultery last Saturday morning. It was absolutely untrue thab she bad been guilty of the slightest misconduct with Mr. Earle. Mr. Justice Barnes asked what course the Queen's Proctor proposed to adopt. Mr. Crackanthorpe said he ab once accented the denial of the charge by Mrs. Carew, and withdrew the allegations. The Queen's Proctor had thought he should be able to bring forward corroborative evidence, but not having been able to do that, he at once unreservedly withdrew the charge of misconduct, and expressed regret. ■ ■ * Mr. Justice Barnes thought the allegation ought never to have been made. COLLAPSE OF THE CASE. Mr. Crackanthorpe, on the part of the Queen's Proctor, said as he did not wish to act in a half-hearted manner, he withdrew the Queen's Proctor's intervention altogether. . * Mr. Justice Barnes said that as the intervention had been withdrawn, there was nothing left to go to the jury. At the request of Mr. Lockwood, the issues were'put before the jury, and they found that' material Evidence had not been withheJiMrom the courts that collusion bad not taVen place, and that there had not been condonation. On the question of Mrs. Carew's . misconduct with Mr. Earle, the jury found she had nob committed adultery (suppressed applause), and the foreman added tnkt the charge was one thab never ought to have been made.

Mr. Justice Barnes expressed satisfaction with the verdict, and said that there was nob the slightest ground for the allegation of adultery. The intervention of the Queen's Proctor was dismissed with costs. Ib was further intimated that the decree nisi, which Mrs. Carew had obtained, would be made absolute. '