Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1891-12-04
COUNTESS RussELL,s sui.
Particulars of Her Husbands Alleged
Brutality Related to the Court.

IBy Anglo-Amor.can c1ble TO tho Dispatch.l
LONDON. Decem her 3.-The proceedings
in the suit of the Countess Russell for sepa-
ration from Earl Russell continued IN court
Yesterday. here was q large crowd pres
emit. hut not so many iaales as before,
the testimony having been Of q revolt
ing nature In her testimony the
Countess reiterated her insinuatiols
As to Professor Roberts and the
Earl. She stated that the separation
from her husband had been regarded
by her as only temporary. 1t came about
on the advice of physician and on ac-
count of the state Of her health caused by
the Earl's brutal treatment. Financial con-
siderations were not the only obstacles To
making up with the Earl. Still it was
true, as she stated yesterday, that to avoid
publicity che was willing to withdraw her
suit if proper allowance was made. In
her testimony she further stated that the
Earl had tainted her with the fact that he
had paid for her underclothlng. She had
repaid the money 20 him afterward.
DY. GodsOn was the next witness. He
testified that be had attended the Countess
and that at certain periods she was sub
ject TO hysteria. At such periods she
might magnify small matters into import
ant ones.
Mrs. Dick, the Countess's maid, testified
confirming tho evidence given by the
Countess as to the Earl's cruelty to ami.
mails aud his abuse Of his wife. He had
threatened TO chastise her, and had, IN
fact. hGrshly handled her. Mrs. Dick also
made intimatiOns as TO the relations be-
tween the Earl and Professor Roberts.
Mrs. Vale, who mad acted az nurse TO the
Countess, testified that she had known the
Countess TO be thrown naked from the bed
by the Earl. She had carried her from the
floor 10 an adjoining room and brought her
back 70 consciousness.
With the presentation Of this testimony
the evidence for the Countess closed.
sIR CHARLES RUssELL's ADDRESS.
The audience craned their necks in their
endeayor to see Sir Charles Russell as he
| arose to present the case for Earl Russell.
Great interest was manifested TO hear this
| celebrated lawyer defend his noble client
! from the charges made against him, and
| there was not a stir in the courtroom as
| he eloquently spoke IN defence OF the Earl.
Sir Charles in substance said that be
would limit himself TO the broad issue OF
| the case. SO far as the separation of the
| Countess and Earl Russell was concerned
all that he would say was that the lady
| was at liberty to leave her husband when
| she liked. The sole object of the present
suit was TO force the payment OF allmony
| by the earl.
Sir Charles, referring 10 the Roberts in
| cident, declared that the Countess, through
| yelled and obscure inuendo. simply de-
sired to wound her husband. She was
afraid 10 strike openly. Why, Sir Charles
| asked, had the other side not made that
serious allegation honestly, straightfor-
| wardly, and directly Unless the sugges-
ton in come ton with Roberts was
meant TO DO treated as a grave charge, to
be grayelY considered and dealt with, &
| greater act OF cruelty could not have been
| performed than in bringing it forward.
Sir Charles then proceeded to resent thu
| charges of cruelty. he asked the jury no
| to be carried away by a clever and en-
| eaglng woman telling them a story tina
was untrue in all its essential Details
woman so perverted as to put forward thu
| Roberts incident N order to support
hopeless case by odIous imputations
| These imputatiOns, Sir Charles declared
were made not only against the Earl, bu
against another man whose name and repu
| tation might have been blasted by them i
he had not stood high in the opinion o
| colleagues.
At this point the court adjourned.