The Sun.
London, England, 1864-07-13 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE—(This Day.)

COURT OF DIVORCE.
(Before Sir J. P. Wilde and a Special Jury.)
WALDY AND WALDY AND THE EARL OP BUCHAN.
The Queen's Advocate and Dr. Spinks appeared for the
petitioner ; Dr. Swabey and Mr, Webster for the respon-
dent; and Mr. M. Chambers, QC., and Mr. Inderwick for
the co-respondent,
This was a suit instituted by the husband for a dissolu-
tion of marriage on the ground of his wife's adultery with
the co-respondent, and he also claimed damages. The re-
spondent and co-respondent appeared and pleaded denial.
The Advocate, in opening the case, said that the peti-
tioner was a gentleman of considerable property and a ma-
gistrate, residing. near Stockton-on-Tees, Durham, and the
co-respondent was Stuart Erskine, Lord Cardross, com-
monly known as the Earl of Buchan. The parties were
married on the 25th October, 1852, at Trinity Church,
Marylebone. They lived very happily together, having one
child, a daughter, issue of the marriage. The co-respon-
dent was introduced to the respondent by a Mr Dickson, a
mutual friend, at a race meeting in Yorkshire, when it ap-
peared that the co• respondent took advantage of this intro-
duction to commit the most heartless adultery, by availing
himself of the weakness and vanity of the respondent.
Evidence would be given that in May and June, 1863,
adultery had been committed at 6. Midland-street, Derby,
ice. The respondent went to visit a man at Darlington,
and delayed his journey to stay at Darlington.
The circumstance which led to the discovery of the
adultery was caused by Lord Buchan writing to Mrs Waldy
at her nephew's, and this letter the wife of the latter opened
by mistake, through which he ascertained the intimacy
that subsisted between the respondent and Lord Buchan.
This was lin ruediately communicated to the petitioner, and
the present proceedings were consequently instituted. He
(the Queen's Advocate) would not ask for any specific
amount of damages, but would leave that question for the
jury. During his address the learned counsel read several
letters from the respondent to the petitioner, which proved
that they lived on affectionate terms.
Another letter from the wife was also read, in which she
admitted her criminality, and prayed to be forgiven. Let-
ters from the co-respondent showing the intimacy between
them were also produced.
The marriage was proved.
Mr Dickson was then called, and proved having intro-
duced Mrs Waldy and Lord Buchan to each other.
George Cleghorn said he was waiter at the King's Head,
Darlington, and knew Lord Buchan. On one occasion,
when he entered the room, ho saw Mrs Waldy and Lord
Buchan sitting as close together as possible. She came to
the hotel with two young ladies, who went out and left her
and Lord Buchan together, and they had lunch by them-
selves.

Margaret Craig, lady's maid, gave some criminetive
evidence.
May Fritchley, a chambermaid at the Midland Hotel,
Derby, proved both Lord Buchan and Mrs Waldy having
slept at the hotel in one bed.
Some other evidence was called, which closed the peti-
tioner's cue.

There was no evidence called for the defence. •
The jury after about 20 minutes' deliberation, found that
the adultery had been committed, and assessed the damages
at £2,000.