Omaha daily bee., 1883-03-02
LADY BLANDFoRD's DIvoRcE.
Suit which Has Disturbed the
Fashionable Circles OF London.
London Times.

HiohOeb Ahho ppohOof SuuECuiil, COul-
monty called the Marchioness Of
Blandford, sought the dissolution Of
her marriage with George Charles
Spencer Churchill, commonly called
the Marquis of Blandford, on the
ground of cruelty, desertion and adul.
try. The respondent denied the
charges.
MIR. Inderwlck, In opening the case
for the petitioner, stated that Lord
and Lady Blandford were married In
1869, and there were four children of
the marriage. In the autumn Of 1874
Lord Blsndford became very intimate
with Lady Ayle,ford, and the rela.
lions between him and that lady wero
a source of much unhsppiness to Lady
Blsndford up to the autumn of 1875,
when Lord Blandford left his wife.
In the month of June, 1875, they
had some words at the break
fast table about Lady Aylesford,
and he struck Lady Blandford on the
face, she being at that time within
about two months Of q confinement.
He might at once say that beyond the
fsctof Lady Blandford having made q
statement on the subject to her sister,
there would be no confederation of
Lady Blandford's own evidence as to
that act of cruelty, with the exception
OF q reference made to IL In a corre-
spondence that passed between hus-
band and wife after the birth of the
child. On the Oath Of October, 1876,
Lady Blsndford wrote telling him that
the infant had a mark on the back of
the head, as a consequence of the blow
he had struck her In June. He re.
enclosed her letter, and In n from
himself referred to the blow as "the
h%istori, Incident" This was the only
act OF cruelty charged In the petition.
SEPARATION.
Lord Blsndford had lett his house
and Lady Blandford went to Ireland,
where her father, the duke of Aber.
corn, was at the time lord lieutenant,
and the child was born at Viceregal
She stated In her letter that
abe would be passing through London
in November, aud ON the 18th of that
month, while she was staying with
her children at the Grosvenor hotel,
Park lane, Lord Blandford visited her
and remained In conversation with her
about an hour. He did not, however,
ask to see his children, and for more
than two years after he did not see
the child which was born In the au-
turan of 1876. In the conversation
with Lady Blsndford at the hotel he
told her that he would be hunting in
the following winter and there was
only q probability of his coming to
Oakdene, the house where Lady
Blandford and the children were to
reside: She saw nothing of him till
February, 1876, when she vas staying
with some friends in London. He paid
her q visit, and announced to her that
he would not live with her again. He
would give her no reason for this de-
termination. This was on the ed,
and on the evening of the same day
Lady Blandford wrote to him, asking
him to reconsider what he had said
and pointing out the trouble and
difficulty In which he had placed hel
and the children. In reply he wrote
her q long letter, In which he said,
II reprosch you with nothing, e1oep,
1 could never love you very truly
and "You have been far better than
I have BEEN" In answer to that let.
ter she wrote him another, and, after
a further communication by letter,
they met at the Leatherhead station
on the 8h of March. He re.
fused to give up his relations with
Lady AyleAford and to live again
with his wife, and after that interview
Lady Blandford did not see him
again till May, 1873.
A PETITION.
In the meantime her family had be,
come very anxious that some proceed
ings should be taken against Lore
Blsndford, but Lady Blsndford olunl
to the hope that the time would arrive
when he would return to her, and fol
the sake of her children she was anx
ions that there should not be q divorce
For q long time 1t was. impossible t.
bring Lord Blandford to any arrange
ment, and In February of the yea,
1873 q petition was presented by Lad
Blandford for q judicial separation
That petition val not proceeded with
because, in March of the same year
q private deed of separation was exc
cuted. But Lady Blandford did no
regard their separation rs q final one
and having heard that he had glvel
up living with Lady Aylesford, ant
that the latter had returned to he
family, she wrote to him from
Blarritz on the 9th of March
1873, suggesting that they shoul'
have q meeting at Bayonne, an,
assuring him that she would forgiv
and forget his conduct In the past If h
gave up Lady Aylesford altogethe
and returned to his wife and children
After a written correspondence the
met at the Hotel Westminster, 4
Paris, on the 18th of May, 1873
was agreed between them that the
should resume cohabitstion but 1t wa
arranged that the cohabitation shoul'
not be resumed until the suit of Lor
Aylesford against his wife for sdulter
with Lord Blandford had been di,
posed of. That suit was tried befor
His Lordship In July, 1873, but tn
Queens Proctor having intervene
during Its progress on the ground G
Lord A%ylesford's own adultery and q
collision, and those Issues hsvin
been found in the affirmative, Lor
Aylesford's petition was dismissed
though his wife was found to hsv
committed adultery With Lord Blanc
ford.
A PHOTOGRAPH.
In the same month there was
meeting between Lord and Lad