THE DENNISTOUN CASE.

Wairarapa Age, 14 March 1925, Page 5

THE DENNISTOUN CASE.

A SETTLEMENT OF £lOO,OOO.

SUBROUNDING A HUSBAND WITH DIGNITY.

LONDON, Mar. 12.—The hearing was resumed to-day. Tihe most amusing interlude was when a fashionablydressed woman in the body of the Court began scanning the principals with her opera glasses, and was sternly ordered to cease or leave the Court. Mr Fryzer, Dennistoun’s solicitor, when cross-examined, stated that Dennistoun settled £lOO,OOO on Lady Carnarvon at their marriage, the interest on which was payable to husband and wife according to the trustees’ discretion. A sum of £BOOO bequeathed to Dennistoun by his father had been placed at witness’s disposal to meet the costs of the present case. In replying to plaintiff’s counsel, witness said tihat Lady Carnarvon had provided Dennistoun with £lOO,OOO, which, the day before the marriage, he had tied up by settlement. Witness admitted that the whole oh the interest on the money was handed over to Lady Carnarvon, and not to Dennistoun. Several letters from plaintiff convinced him that she was trying to get money by extortion. Witness explained that Lady Carnarvon desired to surround her husband with dignity, and so provided him with £lOO,OOO. She was a lady of great wealth. Witness estimated that he had been paid between £lO,OOO and £12,000 to meet the costs. He realised that unless he placed on record the plea that the divorce agreement implied a term of chastity on plaintiff’s part he would have been unable to give the names of any men with whom plaintiff was alleged to have misconducted herself. Deteetives had been employed to watch her during 1924, because her present chastity was considered a material issue of the case. Once she had the detective stopped and taken to a police station, where he had to explain himself. He could not say if £3OOO or £4OOO had been spent on detectives.—(A. and N.Z.)