The Sun.
London, England, 1866-03-02 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, MARCH. 2, 1866.

LAW INTELLIGENCE—(This Day.)

COURT OF DIVORCE.
(Before the Judge Ordinary and a Special Jury.)
CAVENDISH V. CAVENDISH AND GORDON.

This was a suit instituted by Frederick William Henry
Cavendish, Esq., against the Hon. Lady Eleanor Sophia
Diana Cavendish, for dissolution of marriage on the
ground of adultery with the Hon. Cecil Gordon, commonly
called Lord Cecil Gordon.

Mr. Hodson, for the petitigner, said Mr. Cavendish
married the respondent, who was the daughter of the
Earl of Clare, on the 27th of April, 1857, and the co-re-
spondent was the father of nine children and brother-in-
law of the respondent. Some time after the marriage Mr.
and Lady Cavendish went to reside at Passy, in France,
and there met the co-respondent, who was living there
with his nine children in straitened circumstances. An
acquaintance sprung up between the parties, and on their
return to England the co-respondent was a frequent visi-
tor to the house of Mr. Cavendish. On one occasion Lord
Gordon visited Mr. Cavendish at his country house at
Silverland, with his eldest daughter, and on that occasion
he was taken ill, and for a week he was kindly treated
by Mr. Cavendish. On his recovery Lord Cecil
Gordon took a house a very short distance
from the petitioner's, and both parties were frequent
visitors. In February, 1865, Lady Eleanor's mother was
very unwell at her residence in Bryanstonc-square, and on
the 2d of that month Lady Eleanor gave directions to have
some boxes packed with dresses and directed to Bryan-
stone-square, \Aare it was represented she was going. Lady
Eleanor loft by the railway for town, her return being
expected the next day. Accordingly the carriage
was sent to the station, but as she did not return
Mr. Cavendish became greatly alarmed. Inquiries were
then made, when it was discovered that Lord Gordon had
also left his wife and children, and had gone no one knew
where. From circumstances that afterwards transpired
it was suspected that Lord Gordon and Lady Eleanor had
gone to Nice, and Mr. Cavendish despatched one of his ser-
vants to the place, and it was found quite true they were liv-
ing there as Mr. and Mrs. Graham. The Earl of Clare and
Lady Clare being both dead, Lady Eleanor became pos-
sessed of the whole of the large property, and the jury
would, of course, draw their own conclusion as to whether
the large fortune of the lady was not to some degree at-
tractive to one who had so grossly outraged the hospitality
and kindness of Mr. Cavendish, and one who himself was
in difficult and straitened circumstances.

The following witnesses were then examined :
The Earl of Cawdor—l am brother-in-law of the peti-
tioner, Mr. Cavendish. I was present at his wedding
with the petitioner in 1857. After the marriage they
stayed at my country house in Carmarthenshire, and also
at my town house. I afterwards dined with them at their
house, Hyde-park-square. They seemed to live very
happily together.
Lieut.-General Jas. Robertson Crauford—l am brother-
in-law of the petitioner. I frequently saw petitioner and
his wife after the marriage. They have stayed with me
frequently. In 1862 and 186$ I resided near the peti-
tioner and his wife, and frequently visited them. They
appeared to live happily together. Mr. Cavendish always
appeared to me a very kind and indulgent husband.
Mr. Frederick John Howard—l reside at Eastbourne. I
am half-brother to the petitioner. I was formerly secretary
to the Earl of Carlisle. I saw them after their marriage,
they appeared to live very happily. Mr. Cavendish seemed
to be an indulgent husband. I recollect the sth of Feb.,
1865. On that day I went to Silverland, St. Leonard; the
residence of Mr. Cavendish. On arrival there I was in-
formed that his wife had left him. I knew Lord Cecil
Gordon. He is about 60 years of age, and brother-in-law
to Lady Eleanor. Lord Clare died in 1864, and Lady Clarj
also died three or four months ago.
Sarah Harris—l was housemaid to the petitioner in
1864. I remained there till March, 1865. I saw Lord
Cecil Gordon in June, 1844 ; he came to visit Mr. and
Lady Cavendish with his daughter. Lord Gordon was
taken ill at Silverland and was there about a week. He
was treated most kindly. Lord Gordon afterwards went
to live a short distance from Silverland at a place called
Gray's Lodge. Lord Gordon had nine children. I recol-
lect Lady Eleanor going away on.,the 2d February by rail-
way, but she did not return. A carriage was sent twice to
the station for her, but she did not come home again. Mr.
Cavendish by the desertion :of his wife was thrown into
great grief. I have never seen Lady Eleanor since. She left
three children, the eldest was about seven and the youngest
two years old. Lady Eleanor was aboot 30 years of age.
Thomas Anderson —I was in the petitioner's service at
Silverland. Lord Cecil Gordon was a frequent visitor at
the house of, Mr. Cavendish. I recollect Lady Eleanor
going away on the 2d Feb. It was supposed she was going
to her mother. I addressed her boxes to Lady Clare's re-
sidence in Bryanstone-square. Lord Gordon dined at Mr.
Cavendish's a few days previously. He was never seen at
Gray's Lodge after Lady Eleanor left Silverland. I went
to Nice about a fortnight after, and on inquiry I found
Lady Eleanor and Lord Gordon were living there. I saw
them walking there together arm in arm. I returned to
England, and afterwards went back to Nice in March. I
met them again in the Ruo de Plants. I saw them Coma
out of the house in which they were living together.
Lord Cecil Gordon spoke to me when I served the citation.
He said, "I'm sorry you have turned detective." Lady
Eleanor and Lord Gordon were passing ty the name of Mr.
and Mrs Graham.

Amelia Victor—l was nurse to Lady Eleanor at Silver-
land. I recollect her leaving, and I afterwards went over
to Nice, and saw Lord C. Gordon and Lady Eleanor there.
I cannot say they were living together as man and wife,
although they passed as Mr. and Mrs Graham. I returned
to England after remaining a day or two, but went to Nice
again a short time afterwards. On that occasion I remained
four months ; Lady Eleanor and Lord Gordon were there
passing by the name of Graham.
This was the case for the petitioner.
The Judge Ordinary said he did not think that he need
hardly say one word to them on the case as it stood. They
would have to say whether the co-respondent was weak
enough, or bad enough, to leave her husband, who had
treated her kindly, to live with her own brother-in-law.
The co-respondent was a man 60 years of age, with a
family of nine children, and they would have to say whether
he had not taken advantage of his relationship, and thereby
ruined the home and happiness of the petitioner. They
would- have to say what damages the petitioner was
entitled to, but as far as he (the learned judge) could see
there was no protection for the respondent. She had not
been treated unkindly. There was no neglect. She ap-
peared to have forgotten all her obligations to her husband
and her family, and they would by their verdict say
whether or not she was guilty of the crime imputed to her
With respect to the damages, they must also determine
that question, but the fortune of Lady Eleanor was not to
be taken as a measure in assessing them. Although the
OJ-respondent was not a wealthy man, yet it was
said that if a man could not pay in purse
he must in person. Lady Eleanor's property must not
enter into their consideration, as that Smatter will come
before the Court on another occasion and in another form.
They would, therefore, if they decided in favour of the pe-
titioner, give ample though not vindictive damages.
The jury, after a brief deliberation, said they were of
opinion that the parties were guilty of adultery.
The Chief Usher—What damages do you award the
petitioner, gentlemen?

Foreman--We award the sum of .ClO,OOO ; and at the
same time I am directed by the jury to say thit it is ono
of the grossest CASOb that Oyer C4lllO under their considera-
tion.

BANK OF FRANCE.

PARIS, March 1.

The following is the return of the Bank of France
for the week ending to-day, together with the cor-
responding figures of the previous account :

THIRD EDITION.

SUN OFFICE, 7 O'CLOCK.