The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1891-12-02

she had written . letter to Harry Mariellier,
who was the best man at her wedding, assuring
him that she brought no charge against Rob-
erss, adding that she was in the hands OF
clever man and would bring no charges against
the earl unless fully able to prove them. WIZ
ness admitted that she had q former engage
ment to marry before betrothed to Russell, ana
Ii was broken of owing TO the condition OF ner
health Sir Charles asked the witness whetner
she was not treated by two doctors IN 1888 ior q
certain complaint. The countess replied that
the doctors mentioned had given her meol-
cine from time to time.
Witness then stated that the earl had shown
her q letter he had written to his solicitor about
her extravaganza. She asked him not to SEND
the letter, and to let her take copy OF it She
held the letter In her hand while making these
requests In reply the earl forced her to her
knees on the floor. and took the letter from ner.
He used SO much strength that he forced the
bangles on her arms into the flesh until the
blood flowed. She showed her bleeding arms 10
her sister. She further said that at the hnai IN
terview she had with her husband she asked
him for E5 He threw her q half sovereign. say
ing: "That il all you will get" After the
and created O sensation. Witness added tina
she had never made direct charge against
either the earl or Roberts, but admitted that
separation she wrote offering to return II the
earl would offer her ample apology for his
met her half way, the countess said, she would
have returned to him. She made no mention OF
Roberts in this letter, but the earl knew she
objected to having Roberts in the house. She
thought it very strange that the earl left her for
Roberts.
Sir Charles RusselI-Do you not know that
your representative stated that no mputation
against Roberts was meant but the allie gations
regarding him were to show that your husband
cultivated Roberts society by neglecting you?
II han fnrnn ffnrx
Sir Charles-Did you break OF the attempts to
arrange the troubles between yourself and hus-
baud really because of money affairs?
Witness-I thought that his dishonoring me
in the eyes of the world by dshonoring my
checks, showed that he was not regarGful of me.
Besides was told that If were to go back to
him would be treated worse than before.
Sir Charles-Is IL not a fact that within a few
months of your marriage you were found in
debted to the extent of f4,200?
Witness-No.
Sir Charles here read items from number of
bills from various tradesmen. The countess adj
mitted that her husband had demonstrated with
her about getting into debt. She never ran in
debt after marriage. She could not remember
that the first quarrel arose from her debts.
When pressed to remember the circumstances
of the first quarrel the countess burst into tears
81 m sorry l am unable to remember, but I'm not
WE'LL" she said
In answer to the questions regarding her
said it was good, except that she SUI
fered from specific female complaints, which
was given az a reason for breaking the earlier
engagement. She denied that the complaint in
her case was associated with hysteria. She had
never been hysterieal or given to exaggeration.
Witness declared that she had no remembrance
OF her mother coming into her room and implor-
ing her to make friends with her husband She
was not historical on that occasion, nor after
leaving the room did she lose her self-eontrol
and begin to tear off her dress. She never got
in that state.
When Sir Charles began to probe into the re-
lations between the earl and Roberts, the inter-
est became intense. Witness, however, made
replies in such a low tone that only those close
to her could catch them. She said the earl and
Roberts had been friends in college. After the
earl undressed to 60 to bed he told her he was
going to see Roberts.
Sir Charles-Then do you make charges
against Roberts in a way?
Witness-I can not make q charge. Still
know my mind on the subject.
Sir Charles-Did you intend to make charged
Witness-Yes.
separation she heard things from members Of
the family pointing to improprieties.
Sir Charles-What matters7
Witness replied that it was much against her
wish to mention the matter, but she heard it
from the Dowager Countess Russell, Lady
Agatha Russell and Hon. Rollo
Russell. She had also received q letter
from Lord Carlisle The letter from Car
Isle was read. 1t contained no allusion to mis-
conduct. Witness admitted that there was
nothing in The letter to justify charges of mis-
conduct against the earl. Referring to the
alleged cruelty of her husband the countess
said the earl often showed her away when she
tried to kiss him, and had struck her when she
was trying to make up quarrels with him. She
gha i'm, sho had hnvo kfs
ears. Court adjourned before the cross examin-
alton was finished