The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1891-12-02
A HIGH LIFE DIVORCE
Countess Russell Sues for a Legal
Separation.
SHE SAYS THE EARL Is A BRUTE
The Case Causes Much Comment in Polite Cir
cles-Plaintiff on the Witness Stand
Some Interesting Evidence.

lOre JUSTICE Dull, Iner6 commenced To-Day
case which excites much comment par
ticularly in the higher walks of English
life. This case is the application of
Countess Russell for a judicial separation
from her husband, Earl Russell, grandson
of the great Lord John Russell, on the
ground of cruelty.
The troubles between the earl and his
wife have been public talk for months
past. The parties to the suit are well
known in society, and the allegations aud
counter allegations afforded topics for con-
versation in many circles of polite society,
The earl denies the allegations made by
his wife, and explains the whole trouble is
due to his mother-in-law. Sir Charles
Russell appeared for the earl, and Sir
Edward Clarke solicitor general, repre-
sented the countess. The petition of the
countess states from the time she was mar
ried, in February, 1890, until she
left him, Earl Russell hsbitually
| treated her with great harshness and
cruelty, terrifying her and iniuring her
health. The earl compelled her to remain
until or o'clock in the morning doing his
accounts. He also threatened her with
revolver. Not content with abusing and
insulting her in the privacy of their apart
ments, he acted toward her in such a way
she was Inundated before her servants.
The court room was crowded with a
large number of persons, who listened with
close attention to the proceedings. The
countess, accompanied by her mother and
sister, was present. She and her relatives
| occupied seats in the back part of the court
room, seeming to desire to escape from the
observation of the crowd.
Sir Edward Clarke, for petitioner, in
opening the case to-day said the parties to
the suit lived together only four months
| n i1OF IN nnd 1nf of fha vi
Afterwards the countess was in
duced to return to her husband
and they resumed their former married re-
lations. This continued but short time,
however, when the countess found the
esrPs actions iatolereble and again sepa-
rated. After this last separation the earl
wrote affectionately to the countess and
implored her to return to him. The
countess was persuaded against her better
judgment and returned TO her husband
But his affectionate treatment was of short
duration. He again used personal violence
against her and made her life miserable
The countess lost all hope of living happily
with her husband and she again left him.
Prior to separation the matter of the
countess support was talked over and the
earl agreed to allow her ESQ month for
her expenses. This agreement the earl
violated. He paid the first monthly allow
ance. but after that the countess received
nothing from him except checks for the
amount promised, which checks when pre-
sented at the bank were returned dishon-
ore6.
IN PRESENTING THE CASE
for the countess, Sir Edward Clarke
stated when the coup tess married she had
married portion of 100000. This money,
however, had nothing to do with the trou-
BILE. When the countess WIS suffering
from an attack of Influenza, the earl, Sir
Edward declared, compelled the countess
to accompany him on reckless drives in In
clement weather, much to her injury. The
earl made 1t practice to leave her room
and go and stay with a man named Rob-
erts, who was sleeping in the house. He
made the countess go to the servants
closets to see if they were provided with
proper requisites. AS evidence of the esti-
nation in whibh the earl held his wife,
Sir Edward stated he often said he would
like to see her carried out of the house
in coffin. Referring to the earl's
accounts, Sir Edward said he would com
pei the countess to arise after she had re-
tired and go down stairs TO fix them up. He
would then abuse her in the most violent
terms. On more than one occasion he
threw her to the floor and commanded hel
not to move until he returned and gave
J her permission. After denying that his
client was at present or ever had been af-
! tiicted with Mysteries, he stated the mar
: Roberts was mathematical master of
3 school at Bath.
A SERIOUS SUGGESTION AGAINST EARL RUS
, SELL
was involved in his alleged relations will
l Roberts. Sir Edward declared, and hi
} wife could not feel otherwise than that sht
was outraged and distressed by these rela
tions. To show the brutal nature of thu
IT.
I he used to drag cats about with string
. around their necks. More than once
he amused himself by throwing ca
a at the ceiling until he nearly killed tn
+ poor beast. The countess demonstrates
v with the earl against this cruelty, where
\ upon the latter said: 81 will lick you int
= the shape of one if you don't mind" Whel
the countess objected to Roberts presenc
in the house, the earl told her to go to tn,
devil Continuing, Sir Edward said tn
q earl is much upset by the prospect OF ia
countess of not having child. He abuse
> her for this and called her ''beastly bar
d rem woman"
J. Early in May the earl and countess pro
!; posed TO attend a levee. The earl made he
u act as his valet while in London Tn
countess was naturally annoyed that he
husband should force her TO perforr
n mental services, and told him she was
o The Earl at once rang the bell and told tn
@ servant who answered TO summon Lad
g Scott, the countess mother. When Lad
Scott entered the room, the earl said
''here is your sacred daughter, take he
away as soon as you like and you can 20
the devil.n
:. 1t was on her return at her husband
s request after their temporary separatio
q that the countess was found one night mud
D., "a f1K1
~ room occupied by her and the earl. The es1
told the maid who had gone to the ROOF
that some water had fallen on the counties.
night dress and he had taken it off
i When Sir Edward concluded his address
= he called the first witness. This wa
Countess Russell. She arose from her seq
IL in the rear of the room and made her wa
7 to the witness box. When she had take
, her place, Sir Edward proceeded to que.
e ton her. He first asked regarding tt
presence of the man Roberts in the hous
IA and the earl's visits to the room occupie
by him. The countess stated in reply,
SHE HAD DEMONSTRATED WITH THE EAF
h because OF these visits. Being asked
the earl gave any reasons for going
81 Roberts room, the countess made no repl,
but the earl was more unkind TO her whe
Roberts was in the house. Replying I
other questions, the countess said the ca
IT nae IOlu nef uo hept ioouou pistOl Col
, venient and would shoot her if the al
noyed him. When she left the earl 81
N N asked him to kiss her and he refused viii
~ an oath. Describing the quarrel that o
IL Cured between herself and the earl, Il
countess stated the latter rushed about Il
room yelling and striking the walls wit
his fists.
& The countess was attired in an elegal
is blue velvet dress. She wore an expense,
iy boa about her neck and large hat, whit
set of her beauty to great advantage. 81