The Express.
London, England, 1868-02-04 00:00:00

HAYMAILI7.

PIINCKSTS

\i~

BREAKFAST.-EPPS'S COCOA.

Eke en)Veoo.

TO OuRALZSPONDLYTS.
Leatetiemiasta latiaded foe "TM Impress," Leedom Itweateg
Paper. =sibs at the Moe, 10, bouvotta-atreei, by Two
Wawa as the day et pabhcallow.

TBs Enema, THE iii/SILIN-HKARTED CLUB—A WIFE
WELL WON. Meows. Bothers. Backstone, Howe, Kendal,
AYEe PER-VERSION
etc. • and Inas Roberteon.—After
shish II:I4fER PER-VERSION OF THE BRIGAND.

raus ERanw, TIM COLLEEN HAWN. Mr. and Mrs. Non
Bouelcalt.—Alter which THE SMELTS OF LONDON. Mr.
railing, NI efart Murray. Shore, Neville. Forrester, Melee.
Misses Ellsworth), E. Barnett. Stahel Sanger, and Mn. Addle.

STAAB%
THIS ETIPINo, OLD BALT. Mr. !Emery and Miss telly Moore.
I ter which THE CALIPH Or BAGDAD. Simms. Thorne
ad [Ames ; Mesdames Ada Swanhormagb, Johnstone, Harland,
Holt, &c.—And COAL AND COKE.

HOLHOIN.
EVIIMM, TH2 FLYING SCUD. Mewi Atkins, Price,
Garden, Arthur, Westland. end Wllmott MO•daRIOS Henrads,
Goodall. Lennon, and Sanders.—Conclude with YALE- NMI
AND ORSON. Mdlle. Mestere, Little Howells, ita.

H&ETARNIA.
IHi tvzsmo& UPSIDE DOW.—DO' QUIXOTE 111 n. R.
Lane, & Meson Edwin and Booth : Pantocnindatt Yearn Nano.
Louis, Newham, and Victorelli: r Stephan and %as Roo
Nathan.—To conclude with THE PRAIRIE FLOWER.

ITIGHWATER AT LONDON BEIDOL
Tin DAY —MarelAg. filk. iDes--..Aftenioos. 10h. Men.
TO-110140w—liormthi, 100. SM..— —Afternoon, 110. Us.

LONDON, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 4.

LORD WILLOI7OIIIIY VERERBY, twentieth baron,
Hereditary Grand Chamberlain of her Ma.norrY,
_ . .

who combines in his veins some of the noblest

blood, and ai his possession some of the largest
estates in England and Scotland, has just laid
before the public his view of what the honour of
the peerage and the dignity of his station demand
st his hands. The transactions in his private life

which he has thought fit to publish were reported
with sufficient fullness in our impression of yester-

day to relieve ua from the necessity of recounting
them in detail. The leading facts are that he
seduced a married woman of rank, a French-

woman, in 1848, that he hall by her one daughter,

that she left her husband and home and came to
resitle with him, that during the whole time that has
pasted since she has been as faithful to him as
the must virtuous wife could be, that he on his
side introduced her to his friends and relations as

his wife, led his daughter to believe that she was
legitimate, sought from his father an allowance

for her in event of his death ; yes, three years ago,
seduced her maid, and soon thereafter, finding
that his father had made his coming into full poe-

Bessi..it of his property dependent on his abandoning
the Frenchwoman, quarrelled with tho mistress who
had sacrificed all for him, turned her out of the house
bought with her own money, advertised her shame
in the newspapers, and sold the furniture and plate
which ho had formally confessed to be hers, in-
stalling the lady's-maid in the place of the dis-

carded mistress: let even this is not all. When
the Countess u'AtTarnse, after exhausting her
fluids in paying off the debts she had contracted
while hearing the name and tilling the place of
Lord Wimmumisv D'Encssx's wife, sought resti-
tution of the furniture and plate which she had
bought with her own separate fortune, she was

met with denial, every proposal to refer to gentle-
men of honour the question of what allowance
should be made to her and her (laughter was
refused, and when at last she brought her action
to recover what was hers, Lord Wittouglinv
instructed his reluctant counsel to resort to every
legal quibble and subterfuge in order to defeat
justice, making objections which the Loan CHIEF
;JUSTICE characterized as the "11104 utterly and
" entirely unworthy ho ever remembered." Such

are the proceedings which the world is invited to
witness by one of the chief in England's peerage,
and one of the highest in his Sovereign's Court.
We need scarcely say that we have no desire
in this outline of the facts to palliate the original
guilt iif the lady who was plaintiff in the case.
The circumstances attending her abandonment of
her husband were not stated ; they may have been
such as mule her conduct infamous, or they may
have hecti such as but for some technical difficulty
would have entitled her to a divorce. We do not
pronounce upon what is not before us for judg-
ment. It is right, however, to state in her favour
that those who were most intimate with her, and
who could not be naturally prepossessed in her
favour, seem to have regarded her as worthy of
respect. But our concern is with Lord Wm-
D'ERL,BY. In his case, too, we pass
over the commencement of the connection. He
was stated to have always intended, till recently,

to have married the Countess formally as soon
ria the death of her husband would permit the
ceremony to bo legally performed. On both
sides, then, the view which, up to the
period of the quarrel, charity bids us take
in that both, having loved passionately but
unlawfully, regarded themselves as married in the
sight of lkaven. But this excuse of the former
conduct makoa the blackness of the later. Being
thus ed, what are we to think of the man who
seduces he attendant on the woman who was his
virtual t ife ? What are we to think of the de-
cency that laid hands on the furniture and plate
that the virtual wife had bought for their joint use
iii their joint abode ? What are we to think of
the deli‘ Acy that could turn her out to make room
for her waiting maid ? What are wo to think of
the sena" of propriety that could, on learning that
his suet *aims to the enjoyment of wealth was
made to depend on the abandonment of the mother
of his grown-up daughter, calmly tarn her into
the strr to and advertise her position in the news-
papers ? And what of the chivalry that could
come it to a court of English justice to blazon
forth Umese facts, and to bear the rebuke of an
English Judge for compelling his counsel to stoop
to ret::fogging of which he professed himself
ashamo.• in order to screen his noble client from
restore' what ho had taken to the lady whom he
Lad bet..:lyeil and forsaken ?
Thui• are two views to be taken of all these
que.tic..s which we have ventured to put. One
regard, a he conduct of Lord WILLOUGHBY D'EZEBBY
simply as a man. Tried in that capacity, by
whatev..r standard we choose, he must be con-
denim!, for having crowned adultery with shame-
less vi for having preferred a rich inheritance
to his daughter's fair name, for having first robbed
and thco tried to wrong the woman whom he had
ruined. If there were justice in the sentences of
society , crimes like these would be punished with
perpetual exile from every good man's and good
wonisn'A presence. Bat in this case there is
yet se.other consideration. Lord WILLOUGHBY
D'EANIOtY is a man in high place. He is a candle
set on a bushel, and his light cannot be hid. He
is a hereditary legislator, and has to vote on laws
affecting the morality of the public and the sanc-
tity of wedded life. He is an of of the
Court. and has to usher the nobility of the land
into the presence of a pure and virtuous Sove-
reign. He is a landlord, and among all his neigh-
bours, in every farmhouse, in every cottage home
on his wide estates, his conduct exists as a living
example of what men may do and yet retain
honour in England. What sort of influence
is thin to exercise I What support is womanly