The Sun.
London, England, 1849-06-16 00:00:00

Wbition

CONSISTORY.—(THIS DAY.)
(Before Dr. LIISHINGTON.)
FAWCETT V. FAWCETT.
Dr. LIISHINGTON gave judgment in this case this
morning, which was a suit for a divorce on the ground
of adultery. He said—Mr. Fawcett is a clergyman of
the Church of England, and was married on the 4th of
October, 1847, to Miss Eleanor Trevelyan, of Walling-
ton, in Northumberland. There were issue of the mar
riage two children. The ordinary residence of the par-
ties was at Croptball, in Worcestershire, of which Mr.
Fawcett was the curate. During the first nine years
that this marriage subsisted, nothing was alleged to
have taken place which could in any degree require the
notice of the Court. The adultery with which Mrs.
Fawcett was charged was alleged to have been committed
with Mr. Walter Blackett Trevelyan, a second cousin
of Mrs. Fawcett's. It was pleaded that on August 5,
1846, Mrs. Fawcett left Cropthall, and proceeded on a visit
to her brother, Mr. Trevelyan, of Longwitton, near
Newcastle-upon-Tyne. She was accompanied thither by
her husband, and he remained at Longwitton until Sep-
tember, when, after visiting Lady Trevelyan, his wife's
mother, ho returned to Cropthall. The first article then
charged the formation of an undue intimacy. That
charge was the foundation of all that followed, and yet
there was but one single witness examined to support it,
June Rochester, the maid servant of Mrs, Fawcett, a
servant with whom she appeared to have at one time
quarrelled. That was a matter of surprise to the Court,
oecause there must have been individuals capable of es-
tablishing the fact of the alleged undue intimacy between
Mrs. Fawcett and Mr. Walter Trevelyan with great faci-
ty. The whole proof of the article amounted to this, that
Mr. Walter Trevelyan visited at Longwitton, and was
acquainted with Mrs. Fawcett, who was resident there
with her brother for a time. The sixth article pleaded
certain transactions which took place at Seaton Carew,
between the 22d of September and the 13th of October.
That article did not charge adultery, nor any not of
indecent behaviour, but it charged great intimacy. It
also pleaded that the going thither by Mrs. Faw-
cett, was unkaown to Mr. Fawcett, and with-
out his consent, but of that there was no prooc
Mrs. Fawcett lodged in the house of a Mr. and Mrs.
Dixon, _
part Stehaatton Caratricele. w, an
That
hthaety,iwrittichie, aeJanellßgoeciih,
that
Rochester,
Mrs. Fawcett's maid servant, were the witnesses in sup-
port Mr. Walter Trevelyan was
backwards and for-
wards at Mrs.. Fawcett's lodgings, that on the
last occasion of his visit to Seaton Carew be stayed
there for a week, that he took all his meals with Mrs.
Fawcett, that he was there till a late hour at night, and
that there was an extreme degree of intimacy subsisting
between them. All that was very distinctly established
by the evidence of the three witnesses to whom he had
adverted. More could not have been proved, because
more was not charged in the article. But Mr. Dixon,
at the conclusion of his evidence, added, "from what I
saw pass between them on one occasion, while they were
walking out together, having watched them on that occa-
sion, I can state that they not only appeared, but
certainly lived on the same terms of intimacy as hus-
band and wife." Now, he (Dr. Lushington) apprehended
it was quite clear that the Court would never be justi-
fied in considering this as any proof of an adulterous
connexion subsisting between the parties. Independently,
however, of the observation he had just made, enough
was proved, and he might say more than enough, by the
evidence on that article to excite the vigilant suspicion
of the Court. So far it was possible, though not pro-
bable, that the intercourse might be innocent, but cer-
tainly an unrestricted intimacy between a married lady
in the absence of her husband, with a gentleman so dis-
tantly allied to her, might very rately be proved to
be a connexion of a very different and a very cul-
pable kind. The 6th article pleaded that the
parties remain in the drawing-room with the door
locked on the inside, and charged adultery then and on
other occasions in the drawing-room. It alleged that
whilst they were living together at Seaton Carew, and
after the servant had taken away the tea-things on one
occasion from the drawing-room, while Mrs. Fawcett
and Mr. Walker Trevelyan were alone together in the
room, in which there was a sofa, the door was locked
from the inside, and the parties remained in the drawing-
room for several hours, until Mr. Trevelyan quitted the
/wipe to go to his lodgings in the adjoining house, and
that on that occasion, when they were so alone
together, indecent familiarities passed between them.
The only witness OR that article was Jane Rochester; the
Dixons themselves could say nothing. Jane Rochester
said, on one night, whilst the parties were together, she
beard the door of the room bolted from the inside. She
could be under no mistake about it, though she did not
try the door. From the kitchen below, where she was,
she could hear any one walking in the drawing-room, or
do such a thing as fasten the door. Now, he (Dr.
Lushington) must say, he thought a person was blessed
with a peculiar faculty for hearing, who could hear
when she was in the kitchen, when the door of the
drawing
bolted. Thenbetw e
:u she
thesa halting
therelting
a
the unbolting of the door. That was evidence upon
which standing singly and alone he.could not found
considerable
roo
his sentence and his decree. The seventh article pleaded
mint was
ervalbo e
that on the return of Mrs Fawcett to Cropthall, Mr. and
Mrs. Fawcett did not sleep together or ever cohabit
afterwards. Jane Rochester proved that allegation to
some extent. The eighth article pleaded that during the
visits of Mr. Walter Trevelyan to Cropthall,ue in
thereNo-
committed. The evidence on that article consisted of
vember, 1846, and January, 1847,adultery was
the testimony of two witnesses Jane Rochester and
Charlotte Barton. Jane Rochester proved that on one
evening, after family prayers, she was going up to
Mrs. Fawcett's bed-room, as was her custom, when she
saw and heard Mrs. Fawcett and Mr. Walter Trevelyan
burned;
speakingurne; Trevelyan
telling
that together
m
Mrs.
Fawcett
wFtcahe
wet t
et,et stairs,nht 0 i
n Ahtlaord.
Mr.gFo Fawcett v
aic,
re
et firevt
iibnyei.un
hisgs
at that time reading down stairs, and that she heard Mr.
room, and asked her to come and see how nicely
a it
bed-room, and remained with him for twenty minutes;
she (the witness) waiting for her returning during that
interval in Mrs. Fawcett's own bed-room. Then, Char-
lotte Burton said that, in her opinion, there was a great
deal too much familiarity between Mrs. Fawcett and
Mr. Walter Trevelyan when he was on a visit at Crop-
thall, and more than she (witness) should hare
liked if she had been Mrs. Fawcett's hus.
band; she considered they conducted them
selves towards each other with unbecoming
familiarity; she witnessed it in their looks and manner;
and on one occasion she saw Mr. Trevelyan put his arm
round Mrs. Fawcett and kiss her. The Learned Judge
then proceeded to review at great length the evidence
relating to other acts of familiarity alleged, and thus
concluded his judgment. The question was, whether,
upon the whole of the evidence, he could pronounce
adultery to have been proved. Ile could not conacien-