The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1882-12-22

Statements from Members of the New so:k
/ Law FIRM; Jhcy Don't Care 10 be Men.
toned in the AGair-so Disguise at all
J About the Pact that Mrs. Pigeon is ,irs.
I Labouchcre-Do cumenfs from the Rich
InoEd Ghnncery Court showing Exactly TO
/ Whai Statements Mrs. Pigeon and Law
yer Fowler swcre 70 Here in Ricbmond.
Mr.. Thomas Z. Fowler, Of the law firm
OF Dunning, Edsail, Hart &c Fowler, was
/ interviewed Wednesday night by reporter
/ OF the New York Times, and said that Mrs.
I Henrietta Pigeon, WHO instituted the pro-
ceedings in Richmond for a divorce from
Richard Pigeon, was the wife OF Henry
! Laboucberc, the editor OF Truth, in London.
At the close OF the war Dir. Labouchere in
vested GG0,00 in plantation property in
Virginia ard mining property in Georgia.
About $50. 600 WIS put in the former and
the remainder in the latter. Proceedings
have been begun TO perfect the title TO the
property, and Mr.. Fowler and another
member OF his firm accompanied Mrs.
Labouchere to Richmond for that purpose.
Mrs. Labouchere was regularly separated
| from Mr.. Pigeon-vhOSe whereabouts
have been unknown for eight years
seventeen years. ago and was law
fully welded to Mr. Laboucherc. The
record Of divorce here wonld enable Mr..
Laboucherc, fIr. Fowler said. to transfer
property without producing the records OF
/ English courts. IL would likewise permit
Mrs. Labouchcrc 10 release her dover
right rs Iii. lawful wife. There was 10
plan FOR another marriage, The law of
this country made marriage n civil con-
| tract, and did rot require ceremony.
! The proceedings were for America alone.
They were merely supplementary TO the
Droceedingsin England. and were Instituted
by Messrs. Dunung, EdSsll. Hart y Fowler
on instructions from solicitors in England.
| Both MIR. and Mrs. LabOucherc were en-
pccied here in February if the formers
Parliamentary duties did not prevent.
The matter could not probably come up for
three months. and possibly the English
record. might. after all, be fled instead.
All theIc wa. oi it under ordinary circum-
stances was this: il was easier 10 obtain
divorce than to bring hithcr and place on
file the English records. No proceeding
OF the kind wa. Necessary on account OF
the domestic relations OF Ir. and Mrs.
LahOuchorc. Mr. LabOucbcre had great
faith in America, and contemplated further
investments in this country.
ANOTHER STORY.
A representative Of the Now York Tn
JVae saw another member of the law firm,
who, when asked about the suit, said that
he would prefer that their names should
not lie mentioned in connection with the
matter. He said that no suit by Mrs. La
bouchcre or Mrs. Pigeon for divorce from
her husband, in which his firm were her
attorneys. "waS pending" Whether such
suit was contemplated, or whether the
matter was in their hands for legal action.
this gentleman was unwilling 10 state. lie
said that he preferred that the Tribune
should get all it. information from Rich
mOnd and depend upon that. He especially
desired that his name should not he men,
toned as authority for any statement pub
lished.
DEFENDS ON CIRCUMSTANCES.
Mr.. Fowler. the legal adviser Of Mrs.
LabOuchere, was IOund by Il reporter OF
the World, who asked him as TO the truth
OF the story from Richmond. Mr.. Fowler
said: Yes; the story Is substantially cor
rect, though really do not see OF what in
tcrest it can be 70 the public. being as 1t i
a mere matter OF legal record, 10 which The
MayOr OF Richmond was party rs coun-
sci. and affecting only the private rights
and interests OF foreign gentleman and
his WIFE,
"Shall you go on with the proceedings,
Mr. Fowler"
"That will depend entirely on whether
we find Il necessary 10 the protection OF
the rights involved. We may conclude TO 20
ON with them. or we may conclude TO pro-
duce the foreign record. But YOU must
excuse me. Those are private matters. Of
no interest to the public. and | have no
more TO say on the subject"
DECLINE TO TALK.
The Stn says: "MembcTs OF the firm OF
Dunning. Edsall. Hart 4 Fowler last night
declined 10 throw any light upon the re-
port from Richmond. They were non
commital when asked whether they knew
OF sgch IN action, and added that ii il had
been begun their firm was not Interested
IN il. One OF them suggested that the
Grm-name might have been used In con-
ncction with the matter, Lccausc one Of
tie partners was acquainted with Nr. La
bouchcrc. and The firm had transacted some
business for thai gentleman. lie also sug-
gcstcG that, IN h:s opinion, it would be adj
ysable t. await awhile Tor further dcyel-
opment> before giving publicity to the re-
Eort. The mention OF tie name Of the
firm in connection with the matter was
deprecated
I'm this connection It = to lie remember
cd thlt the proceedings here, by and with
the advice Of Richmond counsel, were ac-
tually commenced by NJ. Fowler, oi Dun
ning, EG.all. Hart 4 Fowler. Mr.. FoW-
Ter was accompanied here by Mr.. Dunning,
son OF Nr. Dunning, OF the aforesaid law
iiim.l
The Richmond Documents.
After reading the above, the following,
from the records OF the Chanccry Court OF
Richmond, will prove both valuable and
interesting:
10 the lion. +. II. FTtzhugh, Judge Of the
ChqHcpy court Of tie city OF Richmond
Your complainant, Henrietta Pigeon.
who sues 10y G. |. Darlington, her next
friend, respectfully represents to your
Honor that on the I'd day or July, 1861, at /
Il. Georges church. Hanover Square, Lon |
don. she being then Henrietta llodson, was |
lawfully married TO Richard Pigeon, as |
will appear by documentary evidence or |
testimony Of witnYscs hereafter to be pro-
duced. and your complainant has always
been a true and dutiful wife.
Shortly after said marriage change OF
residence was made TO the United States OF
America, in various parts OF which she has
lived, and always remained constant and
faithful 10 her marital obligations. But,
on the contrary, her said husband many
wears since wilfully abandoned and de-
serted her, and has not since aided in her