The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1874-08-01 00:00:00

"HUGHES v. HUGHES AND
MUIRHEAD.'

In the Court of Divorce and Matrimonial Causes, the above
cans° has boon heard in which Cecil Alfred Hughes prayed
for a dissoly e. of his marriage with Isabella ilubertine ,
Emma Carol-;; i le Clemen, Hughes no the ground of her
adultery wit Robert Dalrytnple Steuart 'Stairhead, and ;
claimed dam. ets The respondent and co-respondent had
filed answers In ~versing the charge.
INDIA eOINCILS BILL. Mr. Hawkins. Q.C., Mr. Thesiger, Q C., and Mr. Biron
Lord Genego Hamilton. in moving the second reading Of
a.earle for the corespondent.ppeareil for Dm petitioner i Mr. O'Malley, Q.C., and Mi.
.
this bill, said be deemed it desirable to go at some length
Pito tho proposal, ash had here to some extent !Maunder- The petitioner was formerly a captain in the 2nd
stood. The India Ceimeil consisted of five ordinary stem- Life Guards, and in 1809 he made the acquaintance of
and or,e extratirtheary member. The financial, iegisla- the respraldent, who la the daughter of the Baroness
the, and military members represented their respective de Tainteguiere, a Belgian lady, at St Leonard's. He
I pz.rtments, but the dial meinirer represented the Home
le 1, a timid (Foreign Department being represented by afterwards met her in London, and proposed and was
Ito Viere,,)), the Agricultural Department slid the De- accepted. 'they were married at Brus.sels on the 21st
ointment ot linotie Works. Public works were being carried ; of March, 18711, and a second marriage ceremony was
on to an enortnous extent in India, and it was considered I celebrated at St. Mary's, Bryanston-square, on the
1..--esviry that a tepresentittlye should Inc appointed ~,h‘, 24th of March, 1870. They afterwards lived at Wind-
pra, t handing er publ works from I
sheold devote himself exclusively te public works.p The sor where Captain Hughes regiment was stationed.
,iee of ovic one erson to ,„ i
he co-respondent, Captain Muirhead, was formerly
1
anO , P T hail been productive of great excess of expenditure
over Gie estimate, a practice which would he put an end to in the Horse Guards Blue. He Was a widower,
by the appointment of one person M take the exclusive and hal been acquainted with Millie. de Tainte-
charge of them Great as had been the expenditure fir guiers a few years before her marriage with Cap-
public works in Inilit daring the past, it would probably be tain Hughes. They had hi. tame attached to one
i...,1, greater il. the future, and it was, therefore, nectroary
that hr. :Ague t system of contrtil F hOnill be histoted . are lier,•rt, dit was stated that at one time they were
Nothirgt ciadil 1,0 farther from Lord Salisbury's mind than engaged to be married, but the engagement was
to do what had been anggcsjed—nsmely, to send a new mem. broken off. In the spring or summer of 1872 Mrs.
her of council to override the deLoi:oal of the Viceroy. It Hughes and Captain Muirhead met in the Park • they
hail twee s rid that Lord Northbrook objegrea moms bin, but renewed their acquaintance with each other, and she
l, • (Lonl G uorg• Hamilton) had the authority of the seen tar, irdroduced him to Captain Hughes. In that year
et State for India to say that the Viceroy did not ohject to ; Captain Hughes had a serious inner:, and was ordered
the Hu gni nai. not written a despatch to oppose it Ile
hiel expressed some objections to it at first on account of the to Homburg. He and Mrs. Hughes, on their way,
i0,r0a,,, i,; me number of the C.eneil it would cause, lout stayed at Spa for five or six days, and Captain Muir.
these hat been removed by the insertion of in clause, arid he , head was there and was a .goial deal iit their society.
now hail no opifilon one way or another. He accompanied them to Homburg' and during part
Me Faweett moved that in the opinion of H the MIS° it cf their stay at Homburg, at the end of August and
wood b
Gdient General of India in relation to it was e inexpe to proceed with the bill until the t_tiae heFinning of September, 1872, they lodged in the
opinion of the overnor
L:ld on the table—Me Smollett seconded the amendment e. Tile
il,lollee. Captain Hughes stated up to that
• Ab...:., long discussion, in which several hon. members time e and his wife Lad lived on the mast affec- I
took lot, sie..; House divided—For the amendnrept, 62 : tionate terms, and he had the utmost confidence in I
against, 11 ; nuticiriti, IVA . her, and did not suspect any impropriety in her conduct
The bill was then read a Incur,., Cm c. He once saw her apparently coming out of Captain
REM YIENTAL EXCHANG se. Muirhead's bedroom, on the ground floor, but she said
Mr. iii,, Iv withdrew the Regimental ExehangeS 1411, ‘11," had only gone to put clown a Prayer-book. In
having anst eaplelned that he had not intended to interfere Septemb,,,r, 1872, they were again at Spa, at the
wiih purchse. HOtel Britannique, sad at her request they occupied
The othera orders were then ,fiaresed of, and the House ads separate bedrooms. One night he saw her in th pas
lea, re 2 0 , sage of the hotel after she had gone to bed, aned on'
another night he saw Captain Muirhead coming from
the aittirro room which was next to her bedroom. But
explanations which satisfied him at the time were
given of both occurrences, and he still suspected
nothing. They afterwards went by invitation to stay
,at the residence of one of Mrs. Hughes's married
sisters in the Ardennes, and Captain Muirhead was

"It may startle many readers to learn that in the
space of 33 years. since the unfortunate steamer P res,de nt
left New York, on the 11th Starch, 1341. never again to be
seen by mortal ken, leaving not a trace of her fate, nearly 55
steamers, including West India mail-boats, have, while on
their passage across the Atlantic, been utterly destroyed."—
Engineer.

one of the party. Captain Hughes was obliged to
go to London on private business, but his wife ex-
pressed a wish to stay a little longer with her sister.
and he allowed her to do so. He had remonstrated
with her on her intimacy with Captain Muirhead
and warned her to be cautious, On hie arrival in
London he heard from his mother that her conduct I
had been talked about, and he wrote to her and asked
her to join hint at once, and said he would meet her
at Brussels. She, however, sent a telegram telling him
not to start, and a letter followed in which she told
him that she was too poorly to travel, and also that
Captain Muirhead was very ill and almost dying.
Captain Hughes wan himself very ill at the time, and
he stated that this letter made him very uneasy. On
the 21st of October he received a telegram from her,
Baying that she was at Dover, and on the following day
she rejoined him in London. Captain Muirheael had I
accompanied her to Dover, and Captain Hughes again
remonstrated with her, telling her that people were '
talking about her, and she treated the suggestion that
she had acted improperly as ridiculous. Captain
Hughes said that he noticed a change in her manner
at this time, and she seemed indifferent to him. On
one occasion during this stay in London they met
Captain Muirhead in the theatre, and afterwards, at
his invitation, went home to supper with him. It
was arranged that they should winter at Pau, and in
November, 1872, on their way to Pau, they were staying
at the residence of another married sister of Mrs.
Hughes, near Rotten. On the 16th of November, during
their stay at-this place, Captain Hughes sow an en-
velope addressed to his wife's maid, and as it looked
to him suspicious he opened it and found that it con-
tained a note in Captain Muirhead's writing addressed
to his wife, in which he called her "my pet," and spoke
d meeting her at Pau. Captain Hughes then taxed
his wife with infidelity, and said he should separate
from her, but she solemnly protested her innocence
and begged him to forgive her indiscretion. He
yielded to herentreatiee and accepted her assurance that
nothing had occurred beyond a flirtation. lie burnt
the letter and promised to keep the affair a secret, and
a letter which arrived the next day from Captain
Muirhead to Mrs. Hughes was also burnt without
being opened. It was arranged that they should go
to Nice instead of Pau, and they continued their journey
as far as Paris. On the 27th of November Captain
Hughes was obliged to come to London in consequence
of his grandmother's death, and he left his wife in
Paris with her mother. She wrote two letters
to him during his absence in very affectionate terms,
and on the 3rd of December, 1872, he returned to
Paris according to arrangement, and went to her
hotel, but found that she had left. He received a
letter from her immediately afterwards, stating that
she should never return to him, and giving as a reason
for her departure that he had broken his promise to
keep secret her clandestine correspondence with
Captain Muirhead by informing his mother of it.
The letter further stated that his mother had written
to her mother speaking of her in terms of reproach,
and saying that she could never receive her again,
and that she had better not continue with her hus-
band. Mrs. Hughes has ever since lived with
Captain Muirhead as his wife. Captain Hughes at
once instituted this suit. It was stated that soon after
the petition was tiled Captain Hughes had challenged
Captain Muirhead, and they had fought a duel at
Calais. The mother of Captain Hughes, Mrs Otway,
was called to corroborate his evidence as to the affec-
tionate terms on which he and Mrs. Hughes had lived
together, and she described Mrs. Hughes as a most
charming young woman during the earlier part of her
married hie. Mrs. Otway also proved that when it
was arranged that Captain and Mrs. Hughes should
winter at Pau, she had written to Captain Muirhead,
begging him not to go there, and to avoid the society
of Mrs. Hughes as much as possible in order that
there might be no ground for any further scandal.
Captain Muirhead, in reply, had assured her that his
intimacy with Mrs. Hughes was quite harmless, and
had promised to follow her advice. Formal evidence
was given that in the middle of December, 1872,
Mrs. Hughes and Captain Muirhead had occupied
apartments in Half Moon-street as husband and wife,
and a formal admission was also read which had been
made to save the expense of a commission to examine
witnesses on the Continent. This admission was to
the effect that adultery had been committed in Sep-
tember and October, 1872, at the Hotel Britannique at
Spa, and on the 20th of October, 1872, at an hotel at
Brussels, and on the 2nd and 3rd of December 1872,
in Paris. The only question in dispute, therefore, was
the amount of damages.
Mr. Hawkins, in aggravation of damages, denounced
in strong language the conduct of the co-respondent,
accusing him of treachery and cold-blooded seduction,
and called on the jury to punish him by awarding
heavy damages.
Mr. O'Malley, in mitigation of damages, attributed
the misfortune which had happened to the petitioner's
own inipru lence in not taking greater precautions
against the renewal of the close intimacy between the
respondent and the co reap indent. They had been at-
tached to each other in early days, and being thrown
constantly together. their attachment was revived
and they yielded to temptation. He also submitted
that it was, improper and contrary to usage to ask for
damages after reparation had been demanded and
given in another way and a duel had been fought.
The Judge-Ordinary, in summing up, told the jury
that the petitioner's conduct was an important element
in considering the amount of damages, but he could
find nothing in the evidence to show that the petitioner
had behaved otherwise than as a kind, attentive, and
careful husband. He cautioned them that it was no
part of their duty to punish the adulterer, but they
were to take into consideration the character of the
respondent and the terms on which she had lived with
the petitioner in order to arrive at an estimate of the
value of the loss he had sustained in losing her. Ad-
verting to the letters written to the co-respondent by
the petitioner's mother, his lordship remarked that al-
though the actual wrong had been .lone at the time
when they were addressed to him, still it was
possible to have preserved the respondent's character
and the petitioner's happiness if he had followed that
lady's advice; but his pivsion appeared to have so
hardened his heart that he was not touched by her
pathetic appeal to his honour. In reference to the
opinion quoted by one of the learned counsel of a
Judge, whom he called "a great Judge," to the effect
that a man might almost be excused for committing
perjury for the purpose of saving the reputation of a
woman with whom he had committed adultery, his
Lordship desired emphatically to say that, in his judg-
ment, no Judge who deserved to be calledit"great "
could ever have given utterance to such an opinion.
The jury returned a verdict for the petitioner, and
assessed the damages at £5,000.
Decree nisi, with costs.