Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1891-12-04
ROBERTS ON THE STAND.
He Refutes All the Imputations in
Connection With Himself.
RUSSELL DENIES ALL CHARGES.
His Version of the Various Quarrels Differs
From His Wifes.
SHE USES OATHS AND CIGARETTES

LONDON, Dec. 3.-Ihe mop Wnlcn is
watching the proceedings of Lady Russell's
suit for separation against her degenerate
spouse, are almost dying with anxiety to
Law hands upon him. They nearly sue.
ceeded yesterday, as was shown in these
dispatches, but they made their game
wary, so they got no chance at him to-day.
During the progress of the trial a large
crowd of roughs had gathered outside the
law courts, and a regular mob surrounded
the entrance, waiting for the Earl to ap.
pear. Much horseplay was INDUCED in by
the crowd, and had they got an opportunity
to get hold of the Earl, he, without doubt,
would have been a most unwilling partici-
pant in their sport He had been warned,
however, of the reception the mob pre-
pared to give him, and when the court ad-
journed he left the building by side door.
The crowd outside, when they learned that
the Earl had escaped them, were highly in
dignant
The Crowd Makes Odious Comparisons.
The interest in the case shows not the
least sign of abatement. On the contrary, it
may be said that on this, the third day of
the proceedings, the general public displays
more avidity to learn all the details of the
expose of the life of one of Great Britain s
peers. On all sides comparisons are made
between the present holder of the title of
Earl Russell and his great ancestor, Lord
John, and later Earl Russell, whose work
in behalf of Great Britain and the British
people is a matter of history.
The feeling entertained for Earl Russell
by the lower classes was amply shown by
their treatment of him as he left the law
courts yesterday, when the mob hooted at
him, and some of the more hot-headed tried
to strike him. There is no denying the
fact that the gentlemen and ladies in the
aristocratic circle to which the Earl be-
longs, also, look with contempt and disgust
upon the noble Earl.
Charged the Countess With Suppression.
Sir Charles Russell declared that the pc
titioner, Countess Russell, had not only ex-
aggerated such facts as she had brought for
ward, but had suppressed others which she
thought would be detrimental to her claims.
The quarrel between the Earl and Countess
at the Albemarle Hotel was due, not to the
Earl's compelling the Countess to act as a
valet to him, as the Countess had testified,
but to the fact that the Earl had refused to
allow his wife to 60 to the Ascot races in
the company of a man with whom he had
every ground to forbid his wife associating.
Immediately on the conclusion of Sir
Charles Russells address he called the first
witness for the defense. The crowd in the
court room looked about with curiosity
when the name of this witness was called,
and everybody was eager to get look at
the man to whom the Countess attributes
much of her unhappiness. The witness was
Prot Roberts, the mathematical master at
Bath, who was in the habit of staying tre-
quently a. the residence of Earl Russell.
The Man Roberts on the Stand.
Prof Roberts testified that he was
friendly with the Earl at college. He after
ward became acquainted with the Scott FAM
ily. After the marriage of the Earl and
Lady Mabel Scott he visited them at their
home He had sung with the Countess and
had thought her a charming hostess. The
witness made very emphatic denial of the
actions imputed to him.
Mr.. Inderwick, of counsel for the Earl,
here asked to be allowed to put in evidence
letters that had passed between the Earl
and Prof. Roberts to show the relations be-
tween them, and permission was granted.
A thrill went through the audience
when Earl Russell was called to take
the stand in his own defense. The
witness testified that he had never heard
the slightest objection made to the presence
of Prot. Roberts in the house. He (the
witness) had objected to his wife going to a
certain lady's house, basing his objection
upon the fact that the lady was diVorcee
Countess Russell was very much put out by
his objection, and in the quarrel that fol-
lowed witness said to her, '.If you say such
things you will soon be sorry you married
me-" The Countess replied, $50 L am
sorry"
Did Not Make Valet of His Wife.
The Earl declared that he had never in
sisted that the Countess should dress him.
If she had not requested him to allow her
to dress him he would not have let her do
so. He was very much attached to her and
had tried to make things pleasant for her.
He objected to her going to Ascot, for the
reason that there were several persons there
whom he did not wish her to meet
With reference to the charge that when
the Countess on one occasion asked him for
225 he threw her half q sovereign, the
Earl said it was not true: He was about to
give her the money she had asked for when
she said: 81 don't want your dirty money"
1t was not true that he made her turn out
her pockets and took away from her what
money she had.
The Earl denied the Countess statement
that on the occasion when he had written a
letter to his solicitor, complaining about
her extravaganza, he had treated her in a
most brutal manner. He did not then shake
her by the shoulders. She wanted a copv
of the letter and tried to seize it. She did
get the letter, but he caught her by the
wrists and took it away from her She then
boxed his ears.
The Bedroorn Fa,pftpp Sce,.
Sir Charles Russell drew from the Earl
his version Of the bedroom incident, when
the Countess was found undressed and in
faint on the floor, as testified to by her
maid. The Countess got out of bed and
tainted ON the floor. When she came to, he
said, "How are you. darling?" She replied,
"Don't you dare call me darling" and then
threw a soap-dish at him and made for him
with a poker She threatened to throw her
self out of the window if he remained in the
room with her.
The Earl declared that the statements
made by the Countess that he left her and
went to Prof Roberts bedroom, were ab-
hysterlcal, he had held her wrists to prevent
her from tearing her dressing jacket to
pieces. On returning to the A1bemarle
Hotel from the levee, he had rebuked the
Countess because she had lunched with a
divorce.
The Earl denied the cruelty to cats that
had been attributed to him. The witness
had never told his wife to plead the 'infant
act, and by this means avoid paying her
debts. On the contrary, he himself agreed
to pay her bills. He did not think his1wife's
health or nerves suffered during her married
life