SOCIETY SCANDALS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 10375, 1 June 1895, Page 7

SOCIETY SCANDALS.

(Fjkom Otfii OttnCokrespondent.)

. v London-, April 20. ..It is not likely that you will expeob me to dilate on the details of the nauseous case of which Oscar Wilde is the loathsome and.most unhsroic hero. He has few who wish him well through the criminal prosecution which he is now undergoing. Most psople think it willba a grave misfortune to society if ever he regaius that freedom which on his own showing he has so vilely abused. What everybody is commenting on in strong terms is ,the fact that such a creature as this Wilde should have beon able to get Lord Queenßbercy, or any deceat person, arrested and deprived of Hbsrty for several hours for seeking to protect his son from the contamination of Wildo'n company. Clearly' there is something out of joint here. It seems now that Wilde's notorious and detestable story "Dorian Grey," when it originally appeared in " Lippinootf s BSagiizine"—without any fault of Messrs Lippincott themselveß, it is only fair to Kay—encountered a most slashing elating from the St. James's G&zutte, whereupon' Wilde threatened a libel action, bub did nofbringit;;-^ ;'V "': ';''/■ ;;.' ■- ■■■'-•;-.;'\ :. \ ':■ ~ Much surprise bas.been^expressed that in spi,te' of u t!ie,horrible dLicloiures, in tbe-,Wilde'base Lord DpnglW'of Hawicfc' and Lord Alfred ■Douglas 6till take part with Wilde against their fathers and that the 'elder of the two brothers ■Should havo penned and pubiiahed ;th'e" gross fakehood that "every member Of our family, except our father disbelieves absolutely and' entirely the allegations of the defence" (in the Queensberry prose'oution), a statement which was promptly refuted by the Rov. Lord Archibald Douglas, Lord Queensberry's brother, who wrote.: "We do, most certainly believe those allegations,"and repudiate any sympathy with the statements of my "nephew." The filarquis's sister (Lady,Florence Dixie) and bis mother take exactly the.samo yjexy as"that put forth by Lord' Archibald..!. Asouredly they have the sympathy of . all dqcent.'people, The two younger Douglases.: niust .have been completely , hypnotised by, that satyr Wilde/ .. .■•.'.-" '...'■■■. •:

...Unfbrtunately this has, not been the.. only unpleasant, .«' society " .'scandal that , has been occupying the. law.. courte. The. Countess j Russell's suitagainsthorhujband the Earl, iW .restitution conjugal rights, is very far. from savoury reading. Lady Russell's conduct seems inexplicable. She w'ss separated from her husband,^ having' made the grossest and most revolting charges '; against him, charges which she now -admits- had not a particle of foundation. : .These charges she never retracted or : apologised for .up to the time of her appearance in the,witness box in this action, and- yet she wants her ill-used: husband to . take her j.bacfc .again l,v. Lord Russell, very naturally' (.pleaded that, as > the serious, charges she.tnide' .-against, him, and more too, at the .time of, her petitiqnior o.jadieial ; Beparation;,froinrhim was j. tried, had .never; been retracted* sthia:should;be; a I ;bar;to:..her,, obtaining;.'restitution; of,?. con j ugal ■KShfyi. ;:<Ba contended fchat'tlie present suit .was nofc,b,rqnght fof 4. Hb .but soiely with,Jfche:o.b']'Bcti of extracting money from him. Further^ he.iurged thai; the, ; promulgatipu of, these oh.arges',as ;also the accusation of oraelty, ill-usage* "and/ bad languageion which .tier former petition was based—amounted to moral.cruelty on her part sb,gros3 as to disentitle her to the relief prayed for. It was.pointed out that no precedent existed for a womanYwho had obtained a .judicial .separation., froni: her ; husband on,.her own petition coming- forward; and seeking to ha'vG him, compelled -to. take her book again,,. .-... ; ; "! ~■:- Lady.Bussell's examinatipn .was a long and curious...oris.: She admitted her 'belief that there was no troth in the vile charges she had made and sworn to against" her husband, but set up the slightly thin, plea that, she did not tmderbtsnd its nature when she so made and swore to it.:. She further declared, that at, the' previous trialsheXvas "bulliedinto making it" —^statement which' created'cbhsiderable sensation. ' She had written to her husband before the sepafation begging him it tell;her all about' nk past- life,' "sis;: "if was"'worrying her to death"•'; but;she declared she:could not re-; •member, what. she; referred to. She;did not know .what' she meanti" or .Why she said it.;: ; ''.-• ■-•••';Some'-friendif-the'CountesswhO evidently aesired, for • reasons^ of ■' her own,';- to 'mtike' mischief; betweet'the 60aple,"and who has very undeservedly'been! ipared. during the 'trial by being "alluded to-' only:;as ''Lady X.": had evidently/rinstilled/' into' thel'sJlly.'CbuntesB1 * weak mirid the idea that her husband had'done" something very vdreadful. Cady Riissetf tried to fix the onus op'the'Dowager Coii'nteiis.'but the latter emphatically denied the truth, of this. ;•< What Chargelwas'tha^'ysn"were'-'b'ullied into ■mafcMJg' ?"■ «sk'e'd. Sir -Henry>'otemeß';''*":Tycharge of neglect." repliedPEady Russell^'.'" Do'' you ■ realty - irieatfto Wyj. thatiyouWeife^bulHedby the prefcent'tiora Chief Justice Mb'1 making a" cbarge'of neglect P'r''-The-'Countess-fbegab 'to whine and whimperl ' "Irdo.-'noffehowijeaiiyj' Sir Henry,"- she laid; :"I am "sodreadfully nervous!" I wonder whatwould have happened to Susan, the slavey,, if Bhe|shufflecVlikg.this.in riourtl Do you think the' judge" would have instantly begged her to sit down andlofferect her his owa private .bottle of'smelling salts ? Hardly, I fancy.1 Bnt that's what happened ,*?., kady Russell.' ;rln; the end t*dy Russell; Said r■" T have "since learned £he real iiiearung. of the charge I was suppoßed^to.m&ke, 1 arid I" ;asked her Whether -tier pb'jfeofc Was no w tog£back' to her husban'd, as she1 believed' him bo be a"'i>tire and virtuous"man,shereplied *•" Veil" ' . ;■ Her mother seems to have acted: a 'strange part. She' adniitteii that she was a bankrupt and'wsiTi!Otnctime!< .dependent on her daughter' :for food:;:;: Yet• she had spent large sufaia on detectives 'to trump 'up ,a caße -agaiasVL Lord Rusnell.- At the;«ametime she was sending him gushing letters wishing hira^e'very happiness, while she;was'writing to one of her detectives, "Dear Mr Dickinson, if you have any good' news write me'one line to ease my mind." She confessed that? by ""good news" she'1 meant proofs of Her sotton-law's : guilt! ; She admitt-ed that "Mr Dickinson was a niost. disgraceful man," but that nevertheless she employed him. She " did not''know, and really could not say " what she meant by saying to'Dickinsbn, "lam sure you have not got the right mati." 'When further pressed she said, "pibkiasbri told her some little things " '=' She admitted writing to DickinsoUj "Aojone who proves: any thing will iot only get my thanks but enough to start them ;inlife.";'!Did you think that wasthewayto get true evidence or false?" asked Sir H; James ' "False," replied Lady Scott. "Is that your answer?" asked the judge, sternly. "I consider all detectives aro false," was the witness's inconsequent reply, which apparently was allowed to pass. "But why," asked Sir H.James, "did you give him enough to start him in life for sitaply doing his duty ?" The witnessstarted on "a new tack. "Becausehe used to write ;me letters .working on my feel;ings,; andbecausehe -happened to' be a. brdkendown gentleman and a cousin of mine."' It' is not Biurpming that this admission elicited roars .<)*,. l^gE''ier- "'■. Then QounSel .remiiided her sha had written,"Though wehave^ehough'ttfhang any ordinary inan.'.it is Hot qurta sufficient for our purpose, and askea h'er how-she explained' that. "I suppose I was in a passion," she said. "Does your anger, madam, produce falsity ? " asked Sir Henry, sternly. "I have never told a falsehood!" answered this veracious woman. l; "Is this letter of yours true ? " persisted Sir Henry Ja<neß. " No, I have not got enough to hfiag him," was the reply. "Then it is false!" exclaimed Sir Henry. " Yes, false," confessed the wretched woman.

She next alleged that her objects in 'these atrocious attempts' at subornation of evidence was to enable her daughter to obtain a divorce or else return to her husband. ' "How could evidence of guilt cause her to go back to her husband,"' was naturally asked. -"Lots of women; go back to guilty men," was the response. : "What was evidence enough to hang aa ordinary man ?" "I can't tell you; it happened' years ago." *•• What was the evidence?" "I don't kaow that there was. any." "What was tho guilt?" "I dohft remember," said the'truthful woman.' "i can't tell an untruth, can I ?"

After more miserable shuffling, the woman said she apologised now 'So .Lord Russell for heir lies about bim. She confessed that she had employed 10 detectives, yet had failed to obtain evidence against her son-in-law. She'admitted she had not yet set anybody up in life ao she promised because she "had hot the money." "Ladies often promise things and don't keep their promise," she explained with psrfect naiconcern. ' '

She atjmiftied thai'she hid paid nothing yet to her creditors in tha bahkruptoy, and that the detectives cost a good dial, bnt she' declined to eater into the question whether brnbt this sort of "thing was very gratifying' to the people who,had supplied her with fl6wiers"anddreai3es;: '.'.I don't "think that"matteirsi" she replied calmly. An attempt had been made to suggest that Lord Rnssell had been " sent down " from Oxford for some act of gross immorality. Ido not say that this witness had suggested it, but at all event3 she admitted now that she believed the "sending down" was merely for practical joking. - WheH she was told aho might leave the bos this excellent woman began on independent address to the jury. "Gentlemen of the Jury," she said, " I trust"—but here counsel abruptly interposed and requested her to leave the speeohifyiug to her daughter's legal representative. So she retired, amid laughter in which she did not join.

Xhe judgment will not be given until nest week. Meanwhile, ib seems to me that the evidence strongly points to desperate efforts having been mude by somebody to foment differences between the husband and wife, and to trump up a false case against him for the sordid purpose of reaping a pecuniary harvest out of the alimony which was sure to he awarded to the wife. It is a disgusting and detastable case. I will not do Bay readers' acumen the injustice to imagine for a moment that they fail to discern whom I suspect a* the " first villain "of this rascally plot. It was a case ef knave working fool. I believe those terms are common to .both sexes.