THE MORDAUNT DIVORCE.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 1993, 25 May 1875, Page 2

THE MORDAUNT DIVORCE.

OPENINGS THE PROCEEDINGS.

The petition of Sir Charles Mordaunt, Baronet, which was filed on the 25th of April, 1869, charging his yrife with adultery, aad asking for a divorce,.was heard on March 11. Various matters connected with the case hare been made public, and may be shortly stated as follows :—The petitioner was married to tlie respondent then Miss Harriet Sarah Moncreiffe, at St. John's Episcopal Church, Perth, on the 6th of December, 1866. Two flays after the filing of the petition it was serrcd on.tha respondent, and her solicitors entered an appearance for her; but, on a representation contained in an affidavit that she* was insane on the -27th July, 1869, the Court appointed her father as guardian ad litem, and on the 25th of February, 1870, a special jury was empanrielled to decide whether or not on the day the citation was served the respondent was in a fit state of mind to instruct her attorney, and after a trial of several days' duration they decided that she was not. In the following March Lord Penzance, the then Judge Ordinary of the Court, made an order " that no further proceedings should be taken in the suit until Lady Mordaunt recovered hermental capacity," but added that the petitioner should hare leave to apply to the Court when able to, affirm her recovery. F"ora this order the petitioner appealed to the full Court, which; on the' cc .sion of the matter being heard, consisted of Lord Chief Baron Kelly, Lord Penzance, and Justice Keating. The two latter upheld the order, while the Chief Baron dissented, and it therefore continued'in force. On the 12th of March, 1872, Dr Harrington Tuke having made an affidavit that the recovery of Lady Mordaunt had become hopeless, Sir- Charles Mordaunt applied to the Court to dismiss his petition, so as to give him an opportunity of appealing to the House of Lords, .and Lord Penzance acceded to this request, and in April, 1873, the petitioner did appeal, and the matter was heard on the Ist of July, 1873, before their Lordships, assisted by Lord Chief Baron Kelly, Mr Baron Mavton, Mr Justice .Keating, Mr Justice Brett, Mr Justice Denman, and Mr Baron Pollock. The present Master of the Rolls (Sir George Jessel), Dr Spinks, Q.C., Sergeant Ballantine, and Mr P. A. Inderwick, as counsel for Sir Charles Mordaunt, argued thal-thTTwEoIe" matter was governed-by the Act of Parliament . establishing "" the,. Divorce Court, and that the insanity "was no bar to the prosecution b£ the appellant's, suit, for, supposing him to be in a position to prove adultery, he had an absolute right to a decree dissolving the marriage. Dr. Deanc, QC, Mr H. Gifford, Q.C., and Mr Searle, who appeared as counsel, for the guardian ad litem, on the other hand, urged that the statute conferred no jurisdiction to dissolve a marriage whilst one of the parties was of unsound mind, as a respondent was entitled to give evidence,-but this right could not be exercised by a lunatic. After considering the matter, judgment was delivered in behalf of Sir Charles Mordaunt, though not without dissent amongst the judges, and the authorised " Law Jffeports " thus set the decision out:—" A petition for a divorce against a wife was met by an allegation of her insanity and consequent inability to defend herself. The court below appointed a guardian ad litem <>n her behalf. Upon a verdict of her insanity, proceedings were suspended, but with liberty to the husband to apply again to the court in the event of her recovering. The husband appealed tq the House of Lorda, insisting that the wife's insanity ought not to bar or impede the investigation of the charge of adultery brought against her. The House adopted this view, and reversing the order appealed against, sent the case back with orders to proceed." Thus the case was returned to the pivorce Court, and, by v leave of the learned Judge-Ordinary, instead of Viscount Cole and Sir Frederick Johnstone being made the^ corespondents, the former only was retaiaed

In that position, and the case was now tried as to the simple question, whether Lady Mordaunt had committed adultery with Lord Gole or no. Dr. Spinks, Q.C., Mr F. A. Inderwick, Q.C., and Mr Geo. Browne were counsel for the petitioner. The respondent was not represented by counsel. Sir Henry James, Q.C., and Mr Lord appeared on behalf of Viscount Cole. A special jury was sworn to try the case. The court was tot unusually crowded, nor was any extraordinary degree of interest manifested in tho trial. „ Mr Browne, who opened the proceedings, informed the jury that.in this case, j Sir Charles Mordaunt was the petitioner, and Lady, Harriet Sarah Mordaunt respondent, Sir Thomas Moncrieffe appearing as guardian, and Lowiy Egerton Cole, commonly called Viscount Cole, was tho co-respondent. The questions were : First—Whether the respondent, Harriet Sarah Mordaunt, committed adultery with the co-respondent, Lowry Egerton Cole, commonly, called Viscount. Cole. Secondly—Whether the corespondent, Lowry Egerton Cole, committed adultery with the respondent, Harriet Sarah Mordaunt. Thirdly—Whether the respondent, Harriet Sarah Mordaunt, committed adultery with some person unknown.. Dr. Spinks, in stating the case, said: Gentlemen of the jury, in this case I appear for tir Charles; Mordaunt, who applies for a dissolution of his marriage on the ground of the N adultery of the respondent. Sir Charles was married to Miss Mpncreiffe, daughter of Sir Thomas Monqreiifo,;-whom probably you all know by name/ :>«?ir: Thomas Moncreiffe lived at Moncreiffa .House, Perthshire, and ijj the father of a "large family of beautiful daughters, wbo are all well married into several families, ia this country. This case has excited considerable, interest; but at the present hearing there will be nothing sensational about it. T shall" simply propose to lay it before you as any other ordinary, case, and I think the evidence will sa.tisfy your minds that we • are entitled to'your verdict. At the time of the marriage^ in 1866 Sir Charles was 29 years of age and his wife 19. He wf I member of Parliament for South Warwickshire from 1859 to 1868, his father*. Sir John Mordaunt, having been member for the same division since .1845. At the time of the marriage Sir, Ghairlett-. Mordaunt. made a handsome settlement on his wife, and down to the time when circumstances occurred that broke up their establishment, they lired as happily together as any married people in the country. At one time they lived at their town house in Cheshaiu-place,,. at. .other times they were in the country, and at another time they were ia Switzerland. In fact, every one believed\hem to be one- > v of the happiest couples ever known. In" ' the summer of 1868 they vere in town; Sir Charles had been in th; habit .for - many years of going to Norwiy for the purpose of-fishing, and it was arranged ia the month of "June of that y«r that he was to go away to Norway on the usual fishing expedition. ; He , wished - Lady . Mordaunt to accompany him, bit she had heard of the discomfort of travelling in those parts; she objected to gc, and it was arranged that she should regain at home. She was to stay in towna week, and then go to Walton Hall, whefe one of - % her sisters was to stay with.her mt'l Sir, ; ; ' Charles returned. It was arrang<d that ■ he should return in August. Wien he got to Norway, however; he fouid the? : fishing had been unusually early, aid he • returned home sooner- than he had intended. He accordingly sent a tele* gram to Lady Mordaunt, at WaltcnHall^ but it seems to have been delayed .ia transmission. It wag received by Jessie Clark, the. maid, who said it ought, to have arrived before. A few days'afterterwards a letter ,was received From 1 Sir Charles from Dover. .It ran thus :—

11 Dover, Tuesday, July the 14. "My Darling Harriet, —I have just time to write on my Tray to Dover, andshall be in London in time to post tha letter to say that I shall be with you- tomorrow. I shall leave Paddington atten, - and reach Warwick at 12.45, and; home by luncheon-time. I am now in the train, so am not able to say much, as it is shaky.-, Since I telegraphed to you a week ago I have travelled day and night, but just missed the boat from Christiania to Hull, or should have got home on Monday . night. So I came through Copenhagen, through Denmark, Belgium and France. The fishing was so nearly over that I did hot think it worth while to stay, and only remained a fortnight, as from the beginning we were three wetks too late—in fact, I never remember the fishing beginning so soon, or the weather so bad.' X used to fish in a great-coat' and two' * pairs of stockings, and could not then keep warm. Please send the trap te^T^ meet me, niy precious darling. As I have * so little luggage it will take everything. I am so happy when I think we shall be together again' so soon, and we will have such a jolly, month at home before going to Scotland—a sort of honeymoon over again. I hope they made no mistake jabout^the telegram whielf"T" scnt,-*^ dlstaTice~-ojr~eea^imles, directly I had settled to come home, as I thought it would be best to give you all the notice I ', could. With my best love, my dearest, :' ever your most^«ffiactio;flate husband— ■ "0. MoBJUIJNT." "I have brought home enough salmon ■■> to last the winter, and .some lovely.silver things for you." I merely read thafc letter to show the - exceedingly affectionate terms on which " they were living together, and also to show that lie had announoed his arrival previous to his coming, which will have an , important bearing on something I will' mention presently, with regard toXord Colts. After he returned they" went to Scotland, and then returned again to Warwickshire. Lady Mordaunt was then known'to be enceinte and was exported to be confined, but not so soon as Febru- - ary. Arrangements had been made for her to come to town to be confined; .but . on the night of the 27th of February she was suddenly taken" ill when hardly any 1 preparations had been made, and on the . following day she was confined. The day after that there was a conversation between Sir Charles and Lady Mordaunt about advertisements of the birth in tho papers, and she particularly, asked" lfhaf papers he had put the advertisements in, and whether he had put " prematurely," He said he had done so. On that and the nexfc day she appeared troubled in. her " mind, and she then arid to him, " Charley, I have deceived you. The child is not.. yours." Of course this was a thunderbolt for Sir Charles, but he asked no questions, and took no notice at the time.' A day or two afterwards she spoke to him again, and appeared to be in distress, and she then distinctly told him the father of

the child was LordColo. There will be undeniable evidence put before you to show that she made this confession not only to her nurse, not only to another servant in the house, but you will find that the confession was made to her - mother, Lady Louisa Monnreiffe, .who came to the house on the 2nd of March, and remained till the 6th. Lady Louisa •was there the whole time, and knew all that was passing, and that; may in a great measure account for the fact that Lady Mordaunt and those acting on her behalf have' entirely withdrawn from taking any part in defending this case. Shortly after this a petition was filed asking for a dissolution ofJCife marriage, and it was serred on the Mth April. Subsequent to that Sir 'Jlomas Moncreiffe,. father of Lady Mordaunt, obtained permission to appear in this court and act as her guardian, and to contest-tha question as to whether she was of soiind mind on the 30th April, when this citation was served. That was tried as long ago as 1869-70, and it was found that : she was not of sound mind. Application was made for a new trial, and proceedings were stayed. After 1871 there was an appeal to the House Vof Lords;'on this court having stayed proceeding!, and the result was that the decision of this court was reTersed,and leave was. given to L-y the issue.' I have mentioned these circumstances to tell you how. it is that, although the adultery occurred in!B6S, it vis only now in 1875 that we are ; trying the real issue in this case] Yott must bear in nrad that there is a distinction between I:.dy Mord&untcommitting adulterywith Lord Cole and Lord Cole coinmitting adultery withfLady Mordaunt. That which might bes evidence;.,of Lady Mordaunt committing adultery on her own confession, could not and should not be received as evidence against Lord Cole. Thus the two. issues are put separately before you,, and I shall endeavour to show you the difference of the evidence in the two cases. I have told you that this confession of the paternity of the child was made deliberately to Sir Charles Mordaunt and to others. This^ of course, would be conclusive evidence as againt Lady Mordaunt. But there* was another piece of remarkable evidence against the lady, namely, an entry in her own pocket diary, which she had always about her. The entry was made in the year 1869, and wa3, " 280 'days from tic 27th of June/ The physicians' opinion that the usual time in such cases of pregnancy is 274 to 2GO days.; This is' a remarkable entry, and it is important to inquire what it means. That brings me to the evidence affecting Lord Cole. Lord Cole was an intimate friend of the family, of Lady Mordaunt, and was intro-duced-to Sir C.'aarles Mordaunt. The Mordaunts and the Moncreiffes had been intimate for years. Lady Mordaunt arid Sir Charles were second cousins, their mother having been first cousins. Lord Cole was received as a friend, and he risited from' time to time at Sir Charles Mordaunt's house. During the season of 186S, when they were staying at Ches-Lam-place, the visits of Lord Cole were Tery frequent—sometimes two or three times a week, and after-Sir Charles had gone away on the 15th of June, in that year his visits became still more frequent. He used to stay a considerable time alone with Lady Mordaunt, and on one occasion —on the 21st June —he stayed'from half-past four to halfpast seven." On the 27 th. of June, to which-; she .referred, lit. Lite diary,rit .seems. Lord Cole dined with Lady Mordaunt Another lady and gentlemen dined there, but this lady and gentleman went away at the usual time, between tea end eleven. Lord Cole remained there alone in the drawing-room with Lady Mordaunt until, close on one o'clock in the morning. The butler went to ,see if he had gone, but did not go into the room. After this, oa the 7th of July, Lady Mordaunt returned to Walton, she having continual excuses for staying in town until that period. On the 7tn arrangements were made for going away, and she went down.with Jessie Clark and some servants to Paddinglon Station, and who should be there but Lord Cole? He look the tickets, firstclass for Lady Mordaunt, and second-class for Jessie Clark, her maid. He handed Lady Mordannt into a first-class carriage, and stood in front of the door talking to her to prevent anyoae else from getting in'.othe carriage. Just before the train stai'ted he jumped into the carriage, and, to the surprise of Jessie Clark, on arrival at Beading, Lord Cole got out. After that she saw no more of him. On the 10th of July some of the other servants went down to Walton. On that day also Lord Cole-went down.-iind stayed in the house till the 13th, until.the arrival of this tele-gi-am fromHhe* husband, saying he was coming home shortly. Immediately upon Lord"Cole left Walton. Sir Charles ariived on the 15th. There was nothing to-interrupt their happiness until this unhappy confession.. Ido not know that I need ifbuble^ou with any further details except with regard, to the request she made to Nurse Hancock. Shortly after she had made this, and after Sir Thomas "fvad been down to see his daughter, slie wrote this brief note :— " My dear Nurse,—Pray say nothing &. all aboot the nonsense which I talked to jou about whilst you were here. \- •■" H. S. Mobdaunt." Now, gentlemen, this is the evidence on the issue taken, before you in this case. If the inference that I have invited you to make is m>t the true one, that Lord Cole committed adultery with Lady Mordaunt, Lord Cole could come here and ex- ■ plain the circumstances and deny the adultery. If rhe is not here to'do that it will be your duty to make tiieiinference, that will be fair and just from his absence, and to say he is not here to deny it-be-cause he cannot deny it. I. therefore ask you to give your verdict.for Sii Charles Mbrdauht on this issue. - ■) . ;.