Little Falls transcript. [volume] (Little Falls, Morrison County, Minn.) 1876-1894, 1886-12-31
0NDTNSE ED N
me Brltlsjh
]. q! !

s On Monala tll,s tlls fn Lond %, Sir
Charles KuesslI come Gded sh{s ar9Hment TOR
Lady Colin xsAnipb BIT, aud Tho Judge sum
molea 40 the case Tor tho jury He said !:
Lord Cam belI denied thia Sife s charges
YofinfdelIt vhich der ended chiefly on the
Testimony oi Lady files yhatever might
Be said against Lady II Hes by the defense,
5Iately Lord Collins friend; that she had
done all in her power to. discpurage the
bringing OF the action against him: and
3thaEsshe only took Lad Colin 8 part when
she became convinced chat unjust charges
were tG be brought against that lady. The
testimony given by the doctors that Mary
Watson was virgo intacta did not mega
tive the testimony given by Lady Miles
that she saw Lord Colin and the girl in
such position as to warrant the belief
that the pair we're guilty. Suspicion, how
ever, was insufficient. lfadultery were not
proved as a fact, the jury we're bound to
find Lord Colin was innocent. At the last
trial in which Lady Colin secured a decree
OF separation it was shown that Lord Colin
had given plaintiff disease in such a
manner as TO amount to thu cruelty which
she alleged as the basis Ut her petition
for separation. In the present case
the evidence against Lady Coli,;
depended on what the family serv-
ants said. THIS should be received with
suspicion. The judge believed Rose Baer
had invented the story about Lady Colin
and the duke sitting together like lovers
Lord Collins conduct towards his wife
while she was in Paris, on the occasion
when he telegra phed the Paris police to ar
rest her and lodge her IN l. prostitute's pris-
on, was outrageous. He never had known
Of anything more dishonorable than Lord
Collins allegation to the Paris officers that
his wife was living in open adultery with
one Of the correspondents, and should be
arrested and treated as a woman OF the
town. The story told by the manservant,
O'Neill, that he once saw, through the key
hole OF the door Of the dining room at Ca.
dagan Place Chief Shaw and Lady Colin in
criminal Intercourse. the Judge could not
regard with favor. The jury must consid-
or whether O'Neilrs letter to Lady Colin,
after hs discharge by her, seeking to re.
enter her employ, was not blackmail,
and should further consider the ques.
ton whether Chief Shaw's testi-
mony in denial, az the statement OF a
distinguished puplic servant, was not
worth as much, il not more, than, the
statement OF such a person as O'Neill.
Gen. Butler should have come into court
and given testimony as to his innocence
but so long as he chose to remain away,
there was no power in England to compel
him to come. 1t would, however, be i'm
possible to examine the matter as affected
by Gen. Butler if he insisted on in remain
ing away from court. because in so doing
he deserted Lady Colin; but the jury MUST
not take Gen. Buffers absence as evil
dence OF guilt on either part.
The Case was then given to the jury, who
retired. After a short absence they re.
turned and reported that they could not
! agree upon a verdict. The disagreement
was not final. They again retired to re-
consider the case, and returned at 10
o'clock with a verdict. They found that
Lord Colin Campbell had not com.
,nitted adultery, and that Lady Colin had
not committed adultery with any OF the Co
respondents. The jury added that the
conduct OF Gen. Butler WAS unworthy o.
a gentleman and had caused the only diff
Guilty which the jury experienced in reach
ing decision. The announcement OF the
| verdict was received with applause. The
newspapers in their comments on the tria
express the opinion that, although the
verdict is unsatisfactory, the jury could
have come to. no other conclusion, anC
the case shows the necessity OF an altera
ton Of the divorce proceedings in the di
rection Of camera trials.