The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1868-06-13 00:00:00

A REMARKABLE DIVORCE CASE.

In the Court for Divorce and Matrimonial Causes,
the cause of Dering r. Dering and Blakeley, Capel
and the Queen's Proctor intervening, came on for hear-
ing, and was as follows :

On the 21st of June, IW, the petitioner, Edward Cholmeley
Dering, obtained a decree Isisd for the dissolution of his
marriage with Harriet Mary Deriug, on the ground of her
adultery with Theophilus Alexander Diakeley. In November,
1867, the lion. Mr. and Mrs. Capel, the father and mother of
the respondent, Intervened, and alleged that the petitioner
was accessory to, or conniving at, the respondent's adultery,
and that the decree was obtained by collusion. The Queen's
Proctor afterwards intervened, and also alleged collusion,
and charged the respondent with having haoitually com-
mitted adultery with the co-respondent since the mouth of
November, 1865, and further alleged that such adultery was
known to the petitioner, and was not brought to the know-
ledge of the ~Court ; that the petitioner connived at the
adultery; and that he was guilty of misconduct conducing
toll.

Mr. Serjeant Parry, Dr. Spinks, Q.C., and Dr. Middleton
appeared tor the petitioner; the Attorney-General, the
Solicitor-General, and Mr. W a Ilarri-on for the Queen's
Proctor ; Mr. at. Chambers, Q.C., ad ,Ur. tlana for Mr.
and Mrs. Cape.

The respondent is the daughter of Mr. and Mrs Adolphus
Cape!, am! was formerly the wife of Lord Forth. she in-
stituted a suit in this Court agalm,t Lord Forth for dissolu-
tion of marriage, but the Queen's Proctor Intervened and
proved that she had been guilty of adultery. with Mr. i,ering,
and her petition was accordingly dismissed. Lord Forth
shortly afterwards died, and Mr. Poring then married her.
They were married on the nth of October. 1861, and after-
wards lived together, sometimes at Clifton May, in Hereford-
shire, and then, from Novemlier, 1665, at No. 1, Boltnnatreet,
London. After they went to live at Boltumstrect
Captain Blakeley was a constant visitor at their house, and
the case of the Queen's Proctor and of the other interveners
was, that fir several months 3lrs. tiering and Captain
Blakeley had carried on an adulterous intimacy with so little
concealment that Mr. Bering must have been aware viii if he
did not wilfully close his eyes to what was going on, or. if lie
was not aware of It, that lie most natal: been ea careless and
negligent with regard to ins wife's conduct that he had no
right to complain of her Infidelity.

-
In support of this case Jane flake, Mrs. rtering's maid, was
examined, and proved that Captain Blakeley was a daily
visitor at Bolton-street, that he wee in the habit of riding
out with Mrs. tiering in the morning, that he generally re-
turned in the afternoon about five o'clock and stayed till
seven, while Mr. Define was at his club ; that Ile frequently
dined there, and stayed from ten till ahout twelve at night,
Mr. Daring being then also at his chili; and that Mr. Daring
was aware of his visits, for Mrs. Daring used to tell him he
had called On April 24. 1464, Mr. and Mrs. Dering went on
a yachting excursion with Captain Blakeley in his yacht, the
Cerc,, from Marseilles to Lisbon and to Algiers, and were
three or four weeks On the voyage. Two other gentlemen
accompanied them as far es Lisbon. Captain Blakeley and
Mrs. Derby were a great deal in each other's company, awl
Mrs. Daring and her husband occupied separate sleeping
cabins. Mr. Daring was described by this witness as a man
of intemperate habits. She state.' in cross-examination
that since the decree nisi Mrs. Daring and captain Blakeley
had been living together, and that they had been staying
for some time with Mrs. Capel, at Deal. Two butlers who
lived with Mr. Dering in Bolton-street were exaniined, and
one of theta corroborated the evidence of Jane Hake
as to Captain Blakeley's daily visits, and Mr. Daring's know-
ledge of them, and further slated that Captain illakeley and
Mr. Storing were on very litiniate and friendly terms with
each other and belonged to the mine club. out that Mr.
Dering appeared to lie an affectiouate husband. cite was
described as a handsome ad attractive woman, and all the
servants said she laid a great hinuence over Mr. Derby.
The sec, n.I bitter all he was otre that Mr. D ring did not
know of Captain Blakeley's virits in the evening, arid he
added that Mr. Deting appeared to have the utmost confi-
dence in his wife. 'Mete was nothing In Mrs. Dering's de-
meanour to Captain Blakeley when her husband was present
to attract his attention. Captain Blakeley was a married
man with a fondly, but Mrs. Blakeley did not visit Mrs.
Dering except on a few occasions it the beginning of their
.artniaintance. Evidence Wits filo, given of frequent drives
to Richmond and Greenwich is Captain Blakeley's phaeton.
Captain Blakeley end Mr, and Mrs Derby u-rd to dine to-
gether, and then return to London, and sometimes Captain
Blakeley left Mr. Derinic at his ebb and drove Mrs. Derby
home. The master anti the steward of Captain IBakeley's
yacht were examined, and corroborated the evidence of the
lady's-maid_ some diaries kept by Mee bertha went also
put in evidence to prove numerous entries of the visits of
Captain Blakeley. These diaries were proved to have been
lying about oath. drawing-table accessible to Mr. Dsrhng,

Mr. berjetnt Parry. In ospenitlff the petitinsso's else smh-
mittssi that there was ma evid, no, to j,l a 1.1 • „
'stitch hail be,. brought ',Pill.' Ii '"'
hound guilty of the odioas and has, cow! , Oils t • hi, .
escept upon the most clear and cionclusive esinewc. It
*mad be proved that Hr. During had introduced his wife to
his family, and had done all he could du to reinstall her in
her social position. but it was not surprising, g
what had happened in Lord Forth's lifetime, that he foeii,l
considerable ditlicult3tmi surrounding her with female society.
There was alrolutely no evidence of Mr. Ilerina's knowledge
of her guilty intimacy with Captain Blakeley until her elope-
ment, on the 28th of May, .1866. He was of an unsuoyitious
generptia dispOsition. &eddy attached to his wife, oil
his eyes ttail liken blinded bybin wife and Captain Illskely
Slid even irhefi the left 'her home he was unwilling to believe
tier guilt. and sent a friend to implore her return. When be
was convinced of her guilt lie was deeply and seriously tin-
tressed. and in the correspondence which then passed between
hint and the reins-di:lent and Mr. and Mrs. Cepa not amines
Mon iiccurred of calm:ranee nrnnai,mthit of any kind in Ida
Port. Ile might, perhaps, have been lest vigilant than Ile
ought. lint there was no foundation for any of the charges
made by the intervener,
'

..... ------ •
The Queen's Proctor and the other interveners charged
the petitioner with haviAtt obtained a decree /0, or th,.
dissolution ~f his marl loge by eollii•i•dt, aid allege I that he
connived at, and eta accessory to, his wife's adultery, and
that he was guilty of misconduct conducing toil:
~.• .

Evidence was produced In support of the petitioner's case,
and Captain Fearon, an intimate friend of Ills, was examined
as to the occurrences whkit followed the respondent leaving
her home in May, 1S:61. Mr. tiering. he said, was in a very
distressed and agitated condition, and believed that his wife
did not know what she wits about when she left his house,
and did not believe that there had been a. y foul play on
Captain Blakeley's part. Ile put the whole case in Captain
earon's hands to act as his friend, and Captain Fearon had
all interview with Captain Blakeley, and obtained Dont him
a promise on his word of honour that he would not see Mrs.
tiering again. Captain Fearon then hall an interview with
Mrs tiering in the presence of her mother, Mrs. Capel, at
the Great Western Hotel, and tried to induce her to rennin
to her husband. She tall she 0.1111.1 not, anti would not re-
turn, and Captain Fearon stated that she was very excited,
and cried and dashed her head 111WD tile table, and rushed
pbout the room like a maniac. She said she should g.. 1 1515,1
Italic was bullied any more, and went out of the hotel, tml
a cab, and drove to Captain Blakeley'a house. Captain
Fearon added that he had known Mr. Derhig for many years,
and had been with him c”iistantly under a variety of cir-
cumstances, and that he never saw him the worse for
liquor.
In crossexamination Captain Fearon said that previous to
the yachting excursion he had observed that Sirs. Gering and
Captain Blakeley were together more than was desirable, and
had spoken to both of them on the subject. Its had seen
malting to find fault with in their conduct, but considering
Mrs. Deting's position, he thought it highly desirable that
she ahould not lay herself open to remarks, and he hail heard
her talked about. Captain Elakeley promised that the
intimacy should be broken off. There was nothing in their
behaviour to each other to attract Mr. Dering's notice, slid
he believed that Mr. Gering had no suspicitat whatever of
soy improper conduct. Mr. Dering hail borrowed £3OO from
Captain Blakeley, he did not know at what date; and Captain
Blakeley afterwards sued him for it.
The petitioner's brother and other relatives anti friends
were examined, and corroborated Captain Fearon's evideime
as to the petdioner's hallitual temperate habits. his affection
for his wife, the absence of any suspicion Oil his part of her
misconduct until after her elopement, and Ids distress of
mind when she left her honie. . . .

having summed up the petitioner's
else,

The Solicitor-General addressed the jury, on behalt the
Queen's Proctor, in reply.

The Judge-Ordinary, in summing up, :laving
traced the history of the married life of the parties,
proceeded to consider the evidence adduced in support
of the several pleas put upon the record by the inter-
veners. With respect to the charge of connivance,
which he defined as "knowledge with acquiescence,"
he pointed out that there was so little warrant for it
that the Folicitor-General, in his address to the jury,
practically abandoned it. No more serious charge
could be made against a gentleman; but as the ground
for the charge in this instance was the supposed
desire of Captain Dering to get rid of his wife,
it 1k :IN impossible to sustain it in the face of the
fact that, after she left her home, he followed her to
London, and did all that he possibly could do to
induce her to return with him. There then re-
mained the charge of "misconduct conducing to her
adultery," but mere carelessness would not amount to
" misconduct " within the meaning of the statute.
Before the jury could arrive at the conclusion that the
petitioner was guilty of such miscondaet, they ought to
be thoroughly satished that the intimacy between the
respondent and co-respondent was of such a character
as to be distinctly dangt ruts, that the husband knew
so much of it as to appreciate the danger, and that he
either purposely or recklessly disregarded it, and took
no steps to prevent it.
The jury retired shortly after twelve o'clock. About
one o'clock an intimation was conveyed to the Court
that the jury were agreed upon three of the issues, but
that they could not agree on the issue of " misconduct
conducing to adultely." Under these circumstances
they wished to know if the parties would receive their
verdict. This was declined, and the jury retired
again. At half-past one o'clock they came back with
a verdict for the petitioner on all the issues, adding,
however, that he had been guilty of great want of
caution. His lordship sail he concurred in their
verdict.