Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-12-23
MRS. LABOUCHERE

Sensation OF Her Own---She Filed
Bill for Divorce from Richard
Pigeon, of Londoo, Eng, at Richmond,
Va.
Richmond Special, Dec. 20.
No little excitement has been caused
here to-day by certain facts which have
leaked out of divorce suit which has been
filed in the chancery court of this city I'M
der the title OF Pigeon VS.. Pigeon. The
strange movements of the fair plaintiff
and such facts as have leaked out about her
hasty trip to Richmond have led to the sus-
picion that Mrs. Labouchere is the lady
who asks for divorce. On the 4th of this
month Messrs. Darlington, Davis & Hoop
OF, prominent law firm of this city, were
VISITED BY LADY,
who was accompanied by Messrs. Dunning
and Fowler, attorneys-at-law, of New York.
The lady, accompanied BY q maid and
these gentlemen, had arrived in this city
by the Northern train on that day. They
at once sought a private interview with the
firm. The lady's name was given as Mrs.
Henrietta Pigeon, of London, England,
and she said she wanted to geta divorce
from her husband, whose nane was given
as Richard Pigeon. The lawyer imme-
diately prepared bill, which has been
filed in the chancery court. This set
forth that the reason for the desire for a
divorce on the part of Mrs. Pigeon from
her husband was that he deserted his wife
and treated her cruelty. The plaintiff
made affidavit to these facts, and also stat
ed that she was
MARRIED IN LONDON. IN JULY, 1864,
and that the issue of hsr union with
Pigeon was son, fifteen years old. The
bill alleges that the whereabouts of the de-
PENDANT Pigeon are unknown to the plant
if. A publication has been made, in con-
formity with the law of the state, setting
forth that the object of the suit is to OBJ
tain divorce from the defendant, and that
he is not a resident of Virginia, and Or
dering him to appear within one month
after the publication of this order and do
what is necessary to protect his interests
in this suit.
TIE PLAINTIFF SUES Ely HER NEXT FRIENI.,
G. 1. Darlington. AfAr stating the case
the parties paid liberal retainer, with
the understanding that they would add a
much larger amount when the divorce
was sued. The Richmond counsel for
Mrs. Pigeon state that they know nothing
of their knowledge to connect the
plaintiff with Mrs. Labouchere. Mr.. Hoop
or, who prepared the affidavit of Mrs. Pig
con, describes her as stout, a brunette about
forty, with cultured manners. She re-
manned here until Dec. z, when she left for
Washington, accompanied by Messrs. Dun
ming and Fowler and her maid. On the
9Th the Washington papers reported the
arrival of Mrs. Labouchere from Virginia,
and also had an interview with her coun-
sci, in which he said his client
HAD BEEN TO VIRGINIA
to look after some matters connected with
the ownership of land. Although every
one here was on the alert expecting Mrs.
Labouchere, owing to publications to the
effect that she would arrive in Richmond,
she was not found. There is lady living
here who knew Mrs. Langtry in England,
and she states that she knew nothing of
Mrs. Lebouchere's visit here, and this
would seem to give color to the report that
Mrs. Labouchere's visit here was sub rosa.
THE BILL STATES THAT MRS. PIGEONS MAIDEN
NAME WAS HENRIETTA HODGsON,
who, it is said, was formerly an actress in
London. Since the departure of the lady,
her counsel here have not heard from her.
They were given London address, to
which they have written for copy of the
certificate of marriage. In her. bill Mrs.
Pigeon prays for the custody of her child,
who is now in England at school, and asks
that Pigeon be restrained from interfering
with him during the tendency of these
proceedings. Col. Darlington, of her
Richmond counsel, is mayor of Richmond,
and is inclined to be rather silent about
the case. The result of the proceedings is
looked forward to with great interest. The
counsel for Mrs. Pigeon is given as Dun
ming, Edsall, Hart d Fowler, and CARING
ton, Davis & Hooper.
PARTIES HERE WHO SEEM TO KNOW
more than they care at present to divulge
are of the opinion that Mrs. Pigeon, who
made the flying trip to Richmond, is none
other than Mrs. Langtry's chaperone,
about whom SO much has recently been
said. Mrs. Pigeon, according to the law
yers' statement, would be back here the
LIST of February, at which time the case is
set for trial, but her presence is not
deemed absolutely necessary.
A RELIABLE AND INTERESTING POINT
has been developed in this case so far, and
that is, that under the Virginia law a
party can come here and sue for divorce
as resident of the state. Mrs. Pigeon was
not here forty eight hours, and yet she is
set down in the bill as a resident of
Virginia. If this mode of procedure
is continued Virginia will necessarily be-
come a convenient state for the getting of
divorces. What is considered as specially
noticeable in that matter is the fact that,
though "Mrs. Labouchere and maid" were
announced as having left New York for
Richmond on the train due here the next
morning, they apparently did not arrive,
while ''Mrs. Pigeon and maid" did come on
that very train. During her stay here it
was proposed to Mrs. Pigeon that she
should drive through the city and see the
points of interest, but she declined, and
remained in her room until time to leave
the city. Her New York counsel took the
drive.
BALLANTINE's CALCULATIONS LAST WEEK.
Tho following from the interview with