The Savannah morning news., 1901-07-21
Conviction FOrfeits His Place in
House of Lords.

CohN1cUOn FOF1eIb his EAhcC Ah
House of Lords.
From the Baltimore Sun.
By pleading guilty and being declar-
ed guilty of the offense charged John
Francis Stanley Russell, second Earl
Russell, loses the right to sit and vote
in the House of Lords, but he retains
his title. For felony a peer loses his
privileges on the floor of the house. but
only when convicted of high treason
does he forfeit the title of nobility.
The offense of bigamy, for which the
Earl has been sentenced to three
months Imprisonment on his plea of
guilty before the House of Lords, was
committed in Nevada April Is. 1900.
The present Earl, who is the grand
son of the famous statesman better
known as Lord John Russell than as
Earl Russell, was married Feb. s.,
1890. to Mabel Edith Scott, youngest
daughter of the late Sir Claude Ed
ward Scott. The couple disagreed al
most from their wedding day, and in
the fall of 1891 the countess sued her
husband for divorce. The case proved
one of the most sensational of it's kind
heard in many years. Besides the sta
Lady Russell made abominable charges
against the Earl, but failed to substan-
tate any of them, and, although pub
lie opinion had been entirely against
the husband at the start, he was heart
lily cheered when a verdict in his favor
was declared. The judge took the al
most unprecedented course of ordering
the Countess to pay the entire costs OF
the trial, amounting to more than
SOS, 600
In April 1895, Lady Russell, who had
been for four years living apart from
her husband, brought suit for a restor-
alton of her conjugal rights. She was
again defeated, the jury returning a
verdict in favor of the Earl, although
Lady Russell had withdrawn all the
charges she had brought against her
husband in the suit for divorce.
The next phase of this remarkable
story of domestic infelicity was a suit
brought in 1896 by Earl Russell against
Lady Scott, his mother-in-law, on a
charge of SANDER.
Early in 1897 this proceeding result
ed in the conviction of Larry Scott, and
her sentence of eight monts' imprison-
ment. At the same time the Countess
was convicted of slandering H. A.
Roberts, a professor of Bath College.
whose name had been coupled with
that of her husband in the scandalous
charges brought against the latter.
In 1897 came the next episode-an APP
plication on the part of the Earl of a
judicial separation from his wife, based
on a charge of legal cruelty in accusing
him of gross offenses. This was granted
him by the lower court, but on an APP
peal the verdict was set aside. The
case was then taken to the House of
Ill saaI
was dismissed in July, 1897, and the
twain remained man and wife.
Earl Russell determined to get rid of
his first wife at all hazards, finally
came to the United States, and in
April 1900 obtained a divorce in Neva-
da. On the 18th of the same month he
was married in that state to Mollie
Somervile, who had also obtained a
Nevada divorce from George John SOM
ervile, her husband, having previous
ly to her marriage to the latter been
divorced from a first husband James
Watson, a Scotchman. The Earl and
his new wife returned to England, and
for fully a year lived in peace together.
In March of this year the first Countess
obtained divorce from the Earl i'll an
English court on the ground of his big
amous marriage to Mrs. Somerville, the
suit not being defended.
Finally. on June II, the Earl was ar
rested on the charge of bigamy, pro-
ceeding in which his first wife has talk
en- no part. He was held in bail at Bow
Street Court, and on being indicted for
the offense the proceeding was notified
to the Lord High Chancellor as presid-
ing officer of the House of Lords, be-
cause of Earl Russell's constitutional
right, as a member of that body, to a
trial by jury of peers. The Earl chose
such trial and the result was his
plea of guilty and his sentence.
The appearance of the Earl before
the House of Lords on the charge of
bigamy is a proceeding the like of
which has not been witnessed for more
than go years. On the last occasion
when a member of the House of Lol ds
was brought before his fellow peers to
answer to a criminal charge the culprit
was the Earl of Cardigan, afterward
famous as a commander of the Light
Brigade in the charge at Balaklava. He
had killed a Captain Tuckett in duel
on Wimbledon Common When he was
indicted for this offense, the Lord
Chancellor appointed a committee to
ascertain the method of procedure on
previous occasions when members of
the nobility had been accorded, as their
right, a trial by their peers. The cele-
brated LORD Sna1teSDurg preSlueu over
this committee, which reported in ac-
cordance with the presidents the cere-
monious procedure that should be fol-
lowed.
When the evidence for the prosecu-
ton was concluded the two eminent
barristers who conducted the defense
raised the technical point that there
was insufficient evidence of the full
Christian name of Lord Cardigan's vic
tim The jury of peers then solemnly
acquitted the prisoner. The Cardigan
affair was such travesty upon justice
and common sense that it was gen.
orally criticised and it was even sug-
gested that there had been a premedi-
ate plan to secure acquittal
TrOabIes of nm Editor.
From the New York Press.
Sir Walter Resant used to cOmDlain