The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1879-08-12 00:00:00

BZOADWZY.

Fonnerrna' Fm..—The Broadway Court " Eng-
land's Hope" held their annual feta on Bank Holiday,
and being favoured with flue weather, was highly
suocesefuL The members fird paraded the village,
headed by the Weymouth Town Band, and then pro-
needed to the fete field, where various sports were
provided. Dancing waa Gamed in and kept up with
much spirit Mere were &large number of viatora,
Including about 300 from Weymouth.

TIIE REV. NEWMAN MALL'S DIVORCE SUIT.
The suit of the Rev. Newman Hall, the well known
Nonconformist minister, for • divorce from his wife Char.
lotte Hall, Ile. Gordon, wise before Sir James Hansen and
a vocal jury on Wednesday. Mr. Hall charges his wife
wiUt &dubiety with • ome.n named Frank Waters
Richardean. The respondent and co-respondent deny the
; and Kra accuses her husband of infidelity,
charge.;
denies. Sir Henry James, (Ix., Mr. Hall's lead-
ing counsel, opened the case at some length, describing
Mrs Hall as • person of wayward habits and as the spoilt
child of her parents. Kr. Hall gave way to her. She
hunted and =eked, and warn with ltichard.ou constantly.
Mr. Hall we. called, and he denied he was mita guilty of
what wee alleged against him.

CLOSS-ILICAYINATION OP XL HALL.
Cross-examined by Mr. Willis, (J.C.—I was afraid to
commence this cue, thinking it would injure my chance
of collecting money for ary church.
Did you believe you had evidence of your wife's a dul.
tery believe! was right in my conclusions, but unless
wee certain of a lual victory I felt it would be dangerous
fore person in my position running a risk of bringing such
an
_action.

You hey. since obtained all the money you required for
your church t—Yes.
And after five years' silence, you are now anxious to find
your wife guilty before the public of adultery f—l should
never have instituted the suit only for the fresh facts that
came to my knowledge.
Do you desire to convict your wife of adultery
Witness (after some heaitation).—Yea
Is that your sole object% instituting these proceedings 1
Witnese (s/ter the question had been several times re.
peated).-1 cannot answer the question without an expla•
nation.

Gives us a plain reply.
Witesies.-1 cannot answer the question in that way. I
wish to give my reasons.
The Judge.—lo that your reason for beginning the
proceedings : Have you any other reason
Witham—l feel that, knowing whet I do, I should give
some reason as to the enswer I should give
Cross-examination resumed. —For nine years you and
Mm. Hall have not spoken :—No.
She never, during that time, communicated with you I—
ND.

—AM she was not under a single obligation to you beyond
what you gave her In irrnif
Have you brought this action for the purpose of being
able to marry again I—Not for that purpose. The result
may be that I may become again free, but that is not the
object that I have particularly in view.
You are sixty-three years of age. Is your object in
coming here to get an opportunity of marrying again If I knew I were to die immediately after the conclusion
of the action. I would still pereevere in it,
Have you no intention, then, of getting married again if
this action succeeds hare.
Have you not a person in your eye :—I have.
Have you not communicated your feelings towards this
person I—Yes.
Examination continued—l had known May Wyatt
since liss. She had in five years stayed in our house three
tones, We maw her at Llandudno. She was always
affectionately received by my wife, who corresponded with
her. I also corresponded with Miss Wyatt. with the con-
sent of her father, mother, and brother. When Mra Hall
sent the conditions on which she would return, I replied
that separation from Richardson must precede any negotia-
tion. On the 4th of February, IVO, we on a sera-
tion. Mr. Strutt was the solicitor. I se:Sreeded pa
illeo a year on
her, and she had .C4O • year independently. The trustees
were Messrs. Ricard and Webb, elders of my church. I
presented a petition for divorce in ICI Facts became
kmwn to me which I did not know at the time of the
separation. I afterwards withdrew that petition. I was
informed that although there was • probability that I
should obtain • divorce, but that it was not absolutely
certain, and being then engaged in building • new church,
to cost .00,000 I was responsible for getting the most of
the money, mei I thought it t a great a rise Last April
or May certain representations were made to me and the
result is the present petition. I got • statement from an
servant named Boyce about twelve months ago.
A servant named Drake deposed to seeing lin Hall and
Richardson kiss each other, and the respondent Ming in
the co-respondent's helmcm. After Drake. evidence the
Court adjourned. On Thursday evidence was given to
the effect the co-reepoodent was repeatedly seen in the
company of Mrs. Hall, and the door of the room in which
tlitly were sitting was frequently locked.
TM case for the petitioner having been brought to a
close, Mr. Willis on the part of the respondent, opened
her case, stating that the defence would be a positive
deniaL Friday was occupied by the evidence of the
respondent, Mrs Charlotte Hall, who denied that her
conduct with the co-respondent was other than that of
"cousins," Her husband knew of her riding on horse-
back, and of her being friendly with the Richardsons.
The hearing of the Newman Hall divorce case was
continued in the Divorce Division on Saturday. The
rms.-examination of Mrs. Hall was resumed, and she
became so excited by the questions put to her that she
was compelled to leave the court for • time. The respon-
dent also frequently interrupted the counsel. Questioned by
her counsel as to her husband's relations with Miss Wyatt,
she stated that she had seen him in Miss Wyatt's bedroom
when the latter was in bed. The co-respondent
Richardson was subsequently examined, and he said that
he was fifteen years old when he met Mr. and Mrs. Hall
at Tring. He total
.denisti the allegatien of i
conduct with Mrs. Hall but said the kissing conniLrettPiejl
down to the present time.
Mrs. Hall said It was a matter of complete indifference
to me whether he (Mr. HMO knew that I kissed yo
You must recollect, in reference to the time persons. You
Hall that I Waled Richardson, that it was 10
years ago, and not even you, with all your ..:72.1,4
suriposs, could remember all the minutia of
whkh happened Causal's_ sge.
Do you treat your hothead as a minutia that you can't
remember?—! do (laughter/
Richardson was asked :—Did you kiss her when you
were at Brighton f—l may have done se—Will you swear
before the jury that you did not kiss her when you were
sitting up alone with her I—l might have done ea She
was • very nervous and suffering woman, and required
very tender treatment in every way.
Do you think that her husband knew that you were kiss-
ing her I—l did not give it • thought.
Do you think, knowing the circumstances under which
you were living with Mrs. Hall, that it was right or wrong
you should have kissed her I—l think conscientiously
there was not any harm in it
Did sou ever kiss her in your own stabler I—l don't
think I did. . . . . . .

--Arr; ;041 not certain divot not taken any note ot such
ig (41. iWhim dldVilayatein of Ueda' between you and lin.
Hall commence l—(Alter wow hwitation). She wee
impulsive, and in gvatitude for nay attentions to her at
Bnghton. probably the commenced it then.
Do you remember the night Mrs. Francia intruded upon
you and Mra. Itall-1! have but, faint recollection of the
affair.
_ .

Did you ever put your arm round her waist t—l may
have done. —What for !—By way of attention when she
was in a nervous skits!, _ _ -

..Mr. Fgewiaan loAfs suit was resumed Wednesday.
After the examination of tits two minor wi
Willis addreered the Jury for the respondent. Zared
that Hr. Hail was the bit man to bring forward this
accusation against his wife until a powerful and irresistible
motive usna upon him. Kr. Hall bad permitted his wile
to be in places of temptation. but had failed to prove any
actual crims against his wile. in proceeding to which he
bed been a consenting party. Mr. With contended that
Hr. Hall knew from the natty* of his wife that there
was uot the slightest fear in exposing her to ternUatice.
He drew competitor's between the conduct of Mr. Bail
and Wary WYltt and Wm Hall and Richardson. sad meld
each haditbe same ground to inspeet ths other but that
each warn se sure of the other's virtu that itoie was
made until Mr. Hail, for strong motives. wOed to be
released. The turned comma then west minutely into
tbs evidence sad comspondanos relating to Mary Wyatt.
—The owe Ii proceeding.