The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1881-12-24 00:00:00

THE STOURBRIDGE OBSERVER.

AN EXTRAORDINARY CASE.

The cause of "Hunter v. Edney, otherwise Hunter," has
been heard in the Divorce Court.—We take the following
report of the proceedings from The Tilll4B

This was an extraordinary case, presenting features
of an unusual and a painful character. It was a suit
instituted by the Petitioner for a declaration of the
nullity of his marriage with the respondent on the
ground of her insanity at the time when the marriage
was supposed to be contracted. When the proceedings
were instituted a defence was entered by direction of
the respondent's relatives. It appeared, however, that
the respondent now declared for herself that sha did
not oppose the petition; and Mr. Searle, the counsel
who had been retained by the solicitor for the relatives,
informed the Judge that the position taken up by the
respondent placed him in a difficulty. He felt that he
now only appeared for the solicitor.

The President said the circumstances certainly were
extraordinary; but he understood that the learned
counsel appeared for the lady's friends. Mr. Searle
said that was so, but if the lady herself, who was in
court, said that she was not resisting the application
he would not be entitled to go on. The President
observed that the learned counsel could not anticipate
what she would say, and he might, therefore, afford the
Court his assistance. The facts of the case, which
was opened by Mr. Bayford, counsel for the peti-
tioner, fully appear in the evidence of the various
witnesses.

Robert Hunter, the petitioner, stated that he was
25 years of age and the respondent 23. His father
was an organ-builder, and he avisted him in his busi-
ness. He made the acquaintance of Miss Emma E.
Edney at Horndean, where her mother kept the "Red
Lion" Inn. This was in June, 1880. There was no
definite engagement of marriage come to on the occa-
sion of that visit, but he wrote to her on his return to
London making a proposal of marriage, which she
accepted by letter of the 16th of June, 1880. In that
letter she addressed him as "Dear Robert," and
said
"I was never so much surprised as when you proposed to
me. I had not the slightest idea you had any regard for me
in that respect. Mother has not any objection whatever
to my being your wife, and I hope, please God, that I shall
prove to you a good industrious wife, and that we shall live
happy and comfortable together all our life. I hope your
parents won't have any objection to your selecting me for
your wife."
She came soon after and remained on a visit with
his family for sdine days. She paid a second visit to
them in 1880, and went about with his mother making
arrangements for his future household. He observed
nothing in her manner except that she was very quiet.
He visited her on Boxing Day and again in January,
when the date of the marriage was fixed. From the
time of their engagement a correspondence of an
affectionate character had gone on between them. On
one occasion he found her in tears, and on others
noticed something in her manner which he put down
to excitement occasioned by the coming marriage. On
the 10th of March she wrote the letter in which she
said :

"I am very sorry to inform you that I am very ill, and
the marriage must be postponed. I cannot be married on
Thursday week. lam very sorry, but what arrangements
you have made you must disarrange. lam so worried and
aggravated that I don't get any rest at all.
In this letter she addressed him as "My dearest
Rob," and signed herself, "Yours most affectionately,
E. E. Edney." He went down on the 12th and
found her ill in bed, but she subsequently got up and
said she was worried but that she would be all right
when the excitement of the marriage was over.
Next day, Sunday, they were taking a walk to a
place where the carriages for the wedding were to be
ordered, and her manner was so quiet and she was so
silent that he said if she was not prepared to carry
out her promises he would return to London. She
then said she was quite prepared to carry them out,
and she conversed with him and went with him to
order the carriages. Her mother told him she had not
been sleeping well. She wrote affectionately on
the 15th of March about the preparations for the
.marriage, and on the 17th he went down for the
marriage ceremony. When he and his friends
arrived she was standing at the inn door. Her manner
was strange, she rubbed her hands occasionally until
they were red. At an early breakfast, which occupied
only a few minutes, she pBured out the tea, and at the
church she behaved in a proper manner. He observed
nothing peculiar about her in the church, but her
finger was so swollen that the ring would not pass
beyond the knuckle joint. .She was silent on the
way from church and at the wedding breakfast.
After the breakfast she acted in a very strange
manner, sitting upstairs and remaining silent, even
when asked by him what was the matter with her.
She did not join in conversation, and at intervals
she rubbed her hands rapidly. Ultimately she
drove with him to the railway station, and they
came by train to London, she maintaining an
almost complete silence. On the way to his father's
house in London they passed the one prepared for
him, which was pointed out to her, but she took
no notice of it. After about ten minutes at his
father's house they drove to his apartments. She told
him that she had never wanted to be mulled, and
that she had been forced to it. He asked her in what
way, and she did not reply. She was tearing the
fringe from her cuffs when he cut them off for her.
She threw them on the fender. She lay on a bed in
her clothes; subsequently she undressed and slept at
intervals. The marriage was not consummated. He
made breakfast for her in the morning and she asked
him to cut her throat. She was occupied about an
hour and a half in dressing herself and during nearly
the whole of that time was looking at herself in a
glass. His sister, father and aunt came that day.
Dr. Miskin was called in; her mother was communi-
cated with, and came up the same day and took his
wife home on the next day. She went down to Horn.
dean on the Monday following. She was in the same
depressed condition. He subsequently received a
letter from her in which she wrote :
"My dear Husband,—lt gives me pleasure to write to tell
you that lam getting better. Harry told me you are coming
to Portsmouth before long. I hope you will call and see
me, so that we may come to some arrangement. I beg for-
giveness for all I have said and done, as it was all my imagi-
nation. I hope you are getting better, for I am sure you
must have been very much worried, and I hope all your
friends are well.—From your most affectionate Wife."
To that letter his solicitor replied by letter to Mrs..
Hunter's mother, in which she was informed that
proceedings would be instituted to have the marriage
declared null.

Alfred Hunter, father of the petitioner, stated that
on the occasion of the respondent's visit to his house,
before her marriage, she appeared to be very fond of
his son. When he arrived at the "Red Lion' with
his son on the day of the marriage he observed her at
the door wringing her hands. She gave the aßswers
..quite correctly, but appeared to take no interest in the
ceremony. On the way back from the church she
was pulling the ring off her finger. The only words he
heard her speak that day were "I cannot go !" Next
day he went to his son's and found her sitting by the
fire, and swaying her body up and down.
Anne Hunter, sister of the petitioner, corroborated
the testimony of her father and brother, so far as the
respondent came under her observation. Miss Hunter
was at Horndean on the day of the marriage. When
she asked the respondent why she did not love her
brother, she only replied, "Too wicked, too wicked ! "
Mrs. Webb, aunt of the petitioner, also gave
corroborative evidence, and stated that on Mrs. Edney
saying to the respondent "You must be mad," the
respondent made no reply.
Dr. Miskin stated that he was sent for on the 18th
March to see the respondent. He found her swaying
her body and wringing her hands During half an
hour she never uttered a word. Having regard to
those symptoms and to her aspect, and the expression
of her eyes, he arrived at the conclusion that she was
insane. He was certain she was, and directed that,
she should be watched in order to prevent her at-
tempting her life. He asked her several questions, to
which she made no reply. He subsequently visited
her at Horndea,n on two occasions within the month
of June, and his opinion remained that she was insane.
When he questioned her then she seemed to look at
her mother for an answer. He found a mark round
her neck, and in her presence he was told that she
had attempted to commit suicide, and had said
she had done so because she was very, naughty
and knew she would not go to heaven. He did not
believe she would ever be free from the liability to
attacks of insanity.

Dr. Savage, senior physician at the Bethlehem
Hospital, saw the respondent on the Bth of April last
at Herndean, for a period of nearly two hours. Her
mother and some other relatives, with a solicitor, were
present. He told her why he had come. She was
pulling at her nails in a manner peculiar to persons
with melancholia. It was with difficulty he could get
a reply from her. She admitted she had married Mr.
Hunter of her own free will, but said she could not
love him or be a wife to him. She said she loved her
mother as much as she could love anybody, but she
was not capable of worldly love. He asked her why
she had attempted to commit suicide; she replied that
she was sorry she had not succeeded. She said she
would have to go to prison; that she regretted all the
trouble she had caused to so good a man as Mr.
Hunter, but she was wicked and could not help it.
Judging from what he was told of the early history of
ber family, her change of disposition, her attempt at
suicide, her idea that she was watched and guarded,
and that she had committed some crime for which she
could be sent to prison, he was of opinion that she
was suffeting from melancholia. He believed that on
the day of her marriage she was not mentally capable
of understanding the nature of the contract.
In reply to Mr. Searle, Dr. Savage stated that the
attack from which he saw the respondent suffering
was probably temporary, but there would be a ten-
dency to a recurrence of such attacks.

Mrs. Hunter, the respondent, who is a delicate.
looking young woman, was then examined by Mr.
Searle. She said that most of the evidence given for
the petitioner was true. There were some particulars
not true, but they were not worth mentioning. She
was aware that she had been married, and she was
aware of the nature of the present proceedings. She
wished Mr. Hunter to have hi s own way in them.

The President having observed that there were
some questions which he thought ought to be put to
the respondent, the following examination was con-
ducted by the learned Judge himself :—Do you under-
stand that it is said you were insane at the time of your
marriage 9—Yes, I know it is said. It is said you were
mad 9—Yes. Do you consider that you were 'mad at
the time 9—No, I do not. Then it amounts to this, that
you, as well as Mr. Hunter, wish to be released from
what was then.supposed to be a marriage 9—Yes, my
lord. It is said you attempted to commit suicide; is
that true 9—l do not remember it. But do you remem-
ber it being said that you had attempted suicide ?
Yes, I know it has been said. It has been said that
there were marks on your throat 9—They were very
slight if there were. But do you know that there
were some?—No ; it is said so, but I did not see them.
Did you feel for them ?—Yes. Do you mean that
there was a time when
you were not conscious ?—No,
Sir, I was always conscious. If that be so, you would
know whether you attempted to commit suicide ?
No, I did not, You say you never did 7—No, I did
not. Who was it said you did ?—I am sure I do not
know. But you heard people say you did 9—Yes.
You heard it before Vo-day ?—Yes I heard it before
to-da i y. From whom did you hear t before to-day?—
do not know. From some person about you 7-1

really do not know. People do say different things,
But you deny it?—Yes, Sir.
In reply to Mr. Bayford, the respondent said she
did not know when she was first told she had
attempted to commit suicide; she did not know that
she was told it; she did not remember that she was
spoken to about it. She thought it quite likely that
she asked her husband to kill her on the morning
after the marriage. She did not know that she was
asked by any one whether she had attempted to
commit suicide. She had not attempted to commit
suicide, and she had had no mark round her throat that
she knew of. If either of the doctors asked her about
it she did not remember it.

Mrs. Edney, examined by Mr. Searle, said she did
not know that her daughter had attempted suicide.
She did see a very small mark under her chain as if
she had pinched herself; but she had not seen a mark
round her neck. If the doctors asked her daughter
,why she had attempted to commit suicide, she did not
not remember that or her daughter's reply.

Cross-examined by Mr. Bayford : She did say on
the day after the marriage that ehe thought her
daughter must be going mad. Her husband, the father
of the respondent, had been more than once in a lunatic
asylum. He is dead.

To the Court: Her daughter had always been virtu-
ous and well-conducted.
The President said he had thought it necessary to
adopt the course which brought about a hearing of this
case in open court. He could not have allowed it to be
withdrawn, without himself having heard the several
witnesses, and observed the manner in which
they gave their evidence. He had now no reason
to entertain the slightest suspicion that there was
any want of good faith in bringing this action.
Mr. Hunter and his family appeared to have behaved
with kindness and consideration towards the respon-
dent; and, on the advice of medical men whom they
had consulted, they naturally arrived at the conclu-
sion which they endeavoured to establish by their evi-
dence that the respondent was not of sound mind at
the time of the marriage. Whether it was the effect
of insanity or not, certainly she exhibited at the time
of the ceremony the greatest reluctance to entering on
the condition of a married woman, and in that respect
she appeared to have continued in the same state of
mind up to the present time. Of course, it was just
possible that she might have given the evidence she
had with the view of freeing herself from a tie which
had become distasteful to her; but he must judge of
the facts of the case by the other evidence as well ashy
hers. The question he had to decide was not whether
she was aware at the time of the marriage that she
was going through a ceremony, but whether she was
capable of understanding the nature of the contract
into which she was entering or was labouring under
the influence of morbid delusions on the subject. The
evidence which had been given showed that at any
rate very soon after the marriage she spoke of herself
as a wicked woman who had committed crime, for
which she was liable to be thrown into ptison, and
as one who, on account of her wickedness, was
unfit to be united to so worthy a person as Mr.
Hunter. Mrs. Edney, the mother, said that her
daughter had always been a well-conducted and
virtuous young woman. Obviously, therefore, a young
woman of that character must be labouring under a
morbid delusion when she imagined she had com-
mitted some crime that exposed her to imprisonment.
It was further shown that she had marks on her
throat, which appeared to the medical man who exa-
mined her to have been caused by an attempt to com-
mit suicide. She had been asked about that circum-
stance to-day, and she had stated that she knew
nothing about it; but she acknowledged to having
been in such a state of feeling on the morning follow-
ing the day of her marriage that she then asked Mr.
Hunter to cut her throat. He had arrived at the con-
cluaion, therefore, that owing to a morbid and
diseased state of mind the respondent was unable to
appreciate the nature of the contract into which she
was entering at the time of the marriage ceremony,
and accordingly, he pronounced a decree- nisi of
nullity of marriage, but without costs.