The New York Herald Newspaper, March 2, 1870, Page 5

AE ERs EE ESE SAL oe Sa ‘who bad no connection with tt; it cast suspicions upon our highest ofticiais, which 18 of itwelf a loss of credit and values to the Cong lt it hag contributed to the spread of extravagance and speculation, de- the worals of trade while affecung all the values of industry. What the losses imeident and consequent, upon this mode of ‘selling gold gander suck combinations and circumstances whe eminent Merchants und others who were before us saa) Wi—AMy, Lowe as to foreign trade, Mr. ro to douesr! ig trade, gnd otbers a8 to all of interests have Spoaerl, se 481 the policy that should bé hereafter Bprwued in the sales of overument gold, if tRese sa! 40 be continued, it 14 not the duty of the coNmmitte ¥0 advise, ‘ue minority are, however, of the 0} that the power to make sales should not be left to the discretion of any officer, no matter bow able and honest he may be. Jt suould be regulated by law. ‘The temptations to an improper use of such a power Way be Loo strong to be resiaved; suspicion will still ImeVitably attach to ite exercise. ‘Thus tue useful- Ress Of the viliciai Will be impaired and reproach be brought upon the government, What amount of com saould be kept tn the Trea- SUry in reserve as & preparation for uniorescen emer- agencies and to give 4 to the convertble Value of the legai tender issues must depend upon conungencies that cannot be anticipated. Leas, bowever, will be required than was ueedea when the work of fuuding the foating debt was in pro- esa, The idications are that a current reserve of $40.0, in addition co the amount ior which gold certilicates have deen issued, wail pe ampie. eapape woud be glad to know in conuection with this ‘panic? thas there are no charges made Or sustained asus. the Hxecutive or bis gubordi- mates. ‘They would be giad to Know that all sus- picions are removed waich these extraordinary schemes have engendered. So far a8 concerns the Presiient, the nilvority were even more desirous than the majoriy of the committees to join ina report entirely rewoving all doupt, even in the minds of tic woss prejudiced, it ‘we Clef Executive und his family. During the ex- amination this was our gilen expressed and urgent desire, We couid take no partisan or ovher pleasure 1n ailifeting a stain or inflicung ® wound upon the Ohiet Executive cf our couniry. It is no agreeabie office to aulect te personal integrity of our common President.’ bis reserved life and military renown and the yreat good will displayed toward him by the pie in making him their choice does and 0 In Some Bort Lesage bio round about, Our pect for his oifice, as well as for himeelf and friends, leads us to iorbear, without the most Positive evidence, to tinplicate him or any of his, by charge or 1wucndo, ia a plot to wade in or tamper with the currcacy, or wffect, for selfish ends, te values of the people. We desire to jom heartily With our colleagues in acquitting him of indifference 0 or acquiescence in such schemes. his being our ‘Wish and motive it might have been expected that our Colleagues Would have been caeerfully prompt to assist in carrying out tie object; and tais was their first design. Alter tesumouy had been taken showing that there Was a part or the plot, a precon certed desizn vo luflueuce Une President in its favor- alter the conferences 80 oiten repeated between the President, risk, Gould and Corvin as the house of the last and ou the steamer of the others; after the Gespatch of the letters by the coniederates tu a dis- tant part of the iand for the eye of the President and his wile; afier the President had bimeelf, a8 18 shown by the testimony of the Secrevary of the Treasury, undertaken 10 in- tervene 10 tos market of gold gales so as to keep Gold up; ater the President is shown to be acon- vert to the crop theory of the conspirators, and alter the jeter written by ‘irs, Grant vo Mrs. Corbin, Which, like the ietver of Corbin to the President, was destroyed; alter all these 5» orn statements pointing to the head of the goverment a8 having some per- sonal respousibitity On this subject of gold sales, and in a iwatter where whe chief of the couspirators was his brotuer-in-law, and after the vestimony be- fore us, showing the origin, progress and collapse of the scheme—it ungit Lave been expected that the committee Would Dot dissolve without giving the Executive an opporvunity of explanation, We say of explanation, put we do not say it as necessarily iwplying lis excuipauon. Nor shouid the majority thus insist. But e: nation was called tor of the different parts wai played or was made to play—it may ve honestly—in a drama where his wile, nis sister and tuat sister’s husband and him- seit Were Constantly appearing as persowe. One word voucisaied irom the President, one statement Trom his wile and bis sister, would nave elucidated Many mysteries and furnisned us the opportunity of saying:—“We, the opponeats of this Execntive, in ail fair criticism, add our tribute to confirm the par- Wai attestation of lis friends, and we do it the more cheerfully because we are vound by our reiations to the a/fministracion to challenge ali 1s acts.” Was this opportunity furnisned? Justice to the Committee requires Us to Say that at first 1t was. It Was leit for tue minority to suggest ths, and it was unanimously agreed Ww, We did it with becoming Tespect, ‘ihe record shows thac Mr. Vox oiered the Jollowing:— T move ‘that the chairman of this committee be requested, cither tn writing oF personally, as he may choose, to contet With the Fresivent of the United States in reference to the seatimony given before the committee which refers to him or Dis family; and that in said conference he respectiuily re- quest of the President, after considering the matter, whether he desires to be heard before or otherwise with reference to ‘said evidence. Shortly aiterwards, on the 4th of February, the honorable cuwirman, General Garfield, made tue fol- lowing report:— In pursuance of the instructions of the committee I called upon the Fresident of the United Btates and stared to bun that in some of the testimony taken bef mal reference wat made to himself and to some mem- of his family, and that the committee bad authorized me to lay before him that portion of the testimony, that he might make any suggestions or statements concerning it if nose. to do so. Tne President desired me to expre: his thanks to the committee for their courtesy, and to say thal he preferred not to ace the testimony nor io make any lon or statement in reference to it during the progress of the investi jon. des gut On the presentation of this report it was sug- gested thg: the President desirea to be more formal and officfal in his reiations with the Committee of Congress than the resolution seemed to indicate. ‘Thereupon, believing that he would be glad to ap- pear aud afford us his explanations (a8 his secretary had, and as President Lincoin had to former com- mittee), aud sili anxious to hear him, so that we might ali join m the justification of his personal in- tegrity as well of is oicial conduct ag ta the gold sacs, Mr, Cox, on the 4tn of February, moved that he be summoned. It was suggested tuat we had not ‘the power to reach the Hxecutive in this way; that bis Only mode of communicating With a co-ordinate branch of the government was by message; that he might have coutemplaved wat mode, and that our only mode of reacuing him for official acts was by impeachment. ‘ihereupon, to remove ail such objec- tions, and still feciing the necessity of hearing from the l’resident, one of his friends on the comuiittee, and in our judzment his wisest friend, on we motion arising on the sth of February to gummon the President, moved to ainend Mt “by requesting” the President to appear before this committee, ‘Ihis vote lo amend, as tie record shows, was lost. ‘There was the sume resuit on the original resviution to summon. The com- mittee could not have shown more respect to the Preadent. Indeed it is our own belies that he woulu not have refused to appear. Even though he may have doubted our power to summon him, he might have waived his rigut and responded. Thus the un- dersigned are ieit for thelr guidance in these mat- ters entirely to the mysterious, unexplamed, con- fiiciing and nebulous teatimony ' which points to but Soe not enter the inviolable chambers of tue White jouse. While We accord to the committee the utmost vigi- Jance in prosecuting their researches into the con- uct of the Sub-Treasurer and the haunts of Ue gold gamblers and their agents in New York, we cannot accord to them the same thoronghness in the ex- amination of oiicials iu tue city of Washington. If1b be true, as iur. A. A, Low testifies, that the conspiracy Was a “weak combination of men to raise the price of gold to the injury of the common interest, basing their calculations on the policy of the government to withhold s0 much goid that they could tmainpuiate the balance; and if this policy ‘‘made specuiation @ matter of easy caiculation,” and whe then committee had already shown by conversations and letters that the Presi- dent haa pert converted to that policy, we demand to know what there 1s m the Executive office that we should stop short, outside of 18 doors, 10 our Ipvestigation? The majority answer:—‘‘There is nowimng to inculpate the President, and our duty does Dot call on us to cali on him until thas is gone.” The majority lay gi streas and give great credence to Mr. Gould. He gave it as is opinion that the President was pure and had no connection wuth the movement. What has that to do with our investigation of ‘‘causes?” Suppose this is Mr. Gould’s opinion; or suppose Mr. Kiak (as be does) gives a dierent opiniou. We know it is a part of tno pian o1 these surewd operators, in wnatters of this quasi-poluucal nature, where their interests are in question, 10 balance or divide their opinions be- tween parties. But are these opinions, even if sbared by the committee, pro or con, rea- won for calling @ halt when the investiga- won reaches the door of the White House’ But even on Mr. Gould’s statement we do mot see why the President should not ve called. Referring to what we have already re- counted as to his testimony (B) as to the two letters sent to Washington, Pa., it is asked of Mr. Gould Low could the “sis letter” requirmg Corbin ‘to stop his gold speculations be arespoase to Vor- Yan's letter to the President on the crop inflation theory? ar. Gould 1a evidently staggered and re- piles, ‘That is a point which has occurrea home.” And again being questioned ae 18 as much puzzied @s the committee was to Know how the Presideut and his tamily a+ Washington, Pa., knew of such speculations; for he says, ‘This jeter of Mrs. Grant mighs look as though he did not kuow them, though mi have learned thom from newspapers or other sources.’’ ‘Ihe minority aiso believe that it would elucidate the facts connected with what 1a called the “sis” letter if the lady who wrote it and the lady who read it were permitted to explain it. The letter was deatroscd. 1t wasa delicate matter to call upon the genticr sex. We did not feel as if our func- tion was exactly that of a court of Justice, which has no “respect” for the sexes 1n the matter of evidence, Bat when the committee summoned a lady who 16 in tne humble occupauion of a telegrapher we saw no reason Why, with proper regard to the wife and sis- ter of the President, they could not, at least, be re- quested to give theirtestimony. ‘the motion of Mr. Jones, of Kentucky, was especially guarded 60 as tu Umit the action of the committee to the “taking of Sherr testimony” not by summoning these ladies to appear ima room of the Capitol, but vy their atate- ment taken where they chose—in tuelr homes—aud tn such ® Way a8 would comport with a due defer- ence to their sex and position. ‘This reqnest, like that afterwards te summon General Dent, of the Executive Mansion, was re- fused. The minority were therefore without the means of thoroughly ee such “causes” of the panic as were connected with the action of the Ex- xutive and his familar connections. The minority do Dot desire to encumber their report with a re hearsal of the points which should and could have whou te commutes tetesedosamucne “iins vestamouy of Uatherwroad, i, Flak and pep fact ow itnesses, O° iustrat Catherwooa, he rejected w: To illustrate. if he is to be believed, saya tnat Corbin told bin w was some interest in the gold sales or pur- chases held by the President's family iu Septemoer last. He also says that Corbin bim he bad bought bonds for Mra. Gran}, Are these slatements true? If not who is to contradict ‘he wore. Hanle Corbin? Or must we believe nt en r r Vatherwood? Again, Catherwood was asked whet! ¢ Rad reason to believe that any member of tue ’§ Household im i pen was 10 any way connected 01 ve . le Was going to at uat Gola iar him, when “he was pped. Corbin is reliable on sowe points, but not on offiers, as it would seem. Hearsay was frequentiy gdmitted by the committee, but not on this occasion, Did not this put the committee on inquiry at the source of mformation ? Second, as to the letter from Mrs. Grant to Mrs. Corbin, there is not the same descripiion of it given by Gould, who saw it, and Vorbin, wno showed it. Mr. Gould says it was signed by Mrs. Granv’s ven name; Mr. Corbin saya 1b Was signed by *Sis.’? ¢ contained an admonition from tue t’resident to c.ose bis (Corbin’s) speculations as quick as be could. In the absence of this letter or alter proof of it destruction, the committee, without indelicacy Yo tne ladies, could have tuken tneir testimony and pemere made ali clear as to the knowledge of tne lent and his family about these speculations. This letter of Mra. Grant (as Gould swears) Was in response to Corbin’s letter to the President. Ir 80, what was Corbin's letier, that it should call for such @ response? ference to his specuiation: relerence to them, else no auch answer would have been responsive. If so, both letters should bave juced, OF on evidence of thelr destruction, ihe parties most concerned should have tafled to thelr contents and object. Yet the com- mittee deny us the iviiege .to hear such parties. Moreover, Mr. Gould thinks that Chapin took two letters to Washington, Pa.—one to the President, from Mr, Corbin, and the other to Mre. Grant, from Mrs, Gorbin. Whether this be true or not 10 18 @ Matier Of such doubt that the testimony of Mra, Grant and Mrs. Corbin should have been @iven vo dissipate or confirm the doubt. What was that other letter of Mrs. Corbin to Mrs. Grant, or Was any such sent? All we kuow is t¢ had reference to Vorbin’s gold speculations. Op this we have no other answer, a8 the only party called is Corbin, and he i not questioned as to this particuiar letter; and if he were, he, a3 we Lave shown, is unreliable. ‘the majority themselves discredit kim more vban they do Gould. in CW he says nothing about a letver from himself to Mra, Grant, sent to Washing- ton, Pa., by Chapin. After the bieakdown in gold Mr. Gould says that Corbin proposed that he ana his wife should goto Wasiungton and get the oraer to sell gold revoked. What passed at Washington, nov only between the men, but the women, is not explained. Even if Mr. Corvin is reliable it does not explain ail that transpired. Yet we are lorvia- den to cali on the ‘ies Who Know most and best of this singular advent for this remarkable object. ‘There were several dealings in stocks, aud even @ tender of @ portion of them by Vorbm to Mrs. Grant. He says that ne rejecied the vender; bat if he 1s unreliable wo is to solve the matter? When asked about this aud similar designs Mr. Corbin ‘ares up, appeais to Almighty God and te resolu. tion of Congress to protect tim. Did Mrs. Grant mform the President of these wsidious approaches or her brother-in-law to ‘-piease ber’? only, but in Teaiity to influence the President? Certaimly Corbin undertook, as be swears, to deceive the President aiter his pretended Closing of his gold transactions, Woav was in that letter which Corbin sent to ine President about Dis betng out of all speculations? What was his real object?’ What eise is tuere in ib besides his statement of tf Where sit? Mrs. Cor- Div had written also, enciosing the letver of ber hus- band, saying that he had no interest in gold; wuat Was in that letter of Mrs. Corbin? AS 1b was con- neoted with this far-reaching and ruinous panic, Which concerned mullions of innocent familes in this country, we ought to know. Tauis is deured us. Again, i¢ was asked Corbin, “Did your wife at tiat ume Know you had made that transactiou?” reier- ring to the god transaction of a haif a million wiih Gould, He answers, “Only as | intormed her; as Gould went out | tola her; sue had no knowledge of the transaction uni 1 toid her what I had done, and remarked that I hoped it would benefit her.” Yet another impression was afterwards attempted to be created by Corbin, to wit, that he did not tell bis wife about his gold speculations ull after the breakdown. All of which 48 Mmportant, and Mrs. Corbin could only cicar it up. esides, there were various interviews Where Mrs. Corbin was present, aud especially the ove 80 graphically, if not correctly, tia by Mr. Fisk, where Wringing of hands aud gnashing of teeth are de picted, and Mrs. Corbin was sent for; and for this we must rely on confused and contradictory tesu- mony, when Mrs. Corbin could at once clariy it. ‘There is great difference also between Corbin and Fisk as to whut Corbin told Fisk—or whether he told him anything—as to Mrs. Grant’s interest of $25,000. A word from Mra, Corbin might have set these facts in a trathful and consistent lignt, as well as for our better understanding of the “causes” ag for tie vin- ication of the parties. But this is dented to us. We have before stated that the President him- self vwook @ special interest in the affairs of the ‘Treasury in reference to gold sales. About the 4tn of September Mr. Boutweil was in Massachusetts and the President in New York, but, however, at these points taking care of the government and its fiscal affairs. ‘The President writes to Mr. Boutweil @ letver, in which (as Mr. Boutwell swears) ‘‘ne ex- pressed an Opiuiog tat 6 was uadesiraple to force down the price 0: Rold. He spoke of the importance of the farmers of the West being able to move their crops.” Mr, Boutwell says he saw the President had “rather @ strong opiuion to tHe eect that the sale of gold in any considerable quantity might carry down the price of it, and that if the price were to fail the Weat would be embarassed,” &c. This letter, so important, is not produced. fndeed, the moat significant correspondence is wanting in this invesu- gation. Now, this letter proves It to be true that the Presi- dentwas strougly 1ubued with the crop theory; he had been impressed by Corbin and Gouid; ail pretences that he kept them, or either of them, aloof and ore- vented their approaca upon this topic is refuted by this ietter. 1t was written at an opportune time1o keep up gold; and whether mtended or not it was directiy in aid of the capital object of the conspiracy. Besides, tne Presidenv’s letter to his Secretary nad ity efect. Mr. Boutweil telegraphed to bis assistant, Mr. Kichardson:—~seud no order to Butterfield as to sales of gold until you hear from me.” ‘This wasa limitation of the gold sales to sales for the sinking fand only for Sepvember. Mr. Boutwell swears that it Was @ revocation of the order to sell gold tor Sep- tember, confining the sales only to the sinking fund, ‘the suggestion of the President ied him, as he says, “to countermand the order,” &c. What is still more significant ig a subsequent let- ter which Mr. Boutwell produces, ‘This other letter was dated only a tortnignt before the black Friday, to wit, 12th September. The Presidens penned it just before be left upon bis Penasylvania trip. [tis Tull of anxiety about gold sales, Lt is the same letter which Corbin had when he assured Gould of the Executive aid. He refers to the struggle of bulls and vears, He warns the Secretary when he should arrive in New York to beware of the bears. That 1s the meaning of it, He writes:—*‘I think from the lights before me I would move on without change until the present struggle 1s over.” Mr. Buutweil swears that by moving on means to sell o million of gold on alternave weeks for vhe beuefit of the sink- ing {and during (he month of September. This never ment tue sale of gold exira like the sale of the four mulitons on the 24th inst. It meant to keep up the price and not to let itdrop. it suited, whevber he Intended 16 or not, the designs of tue conspirators, They acted on it, ‘Tis procedure of the Executive—issuing sugges- tions, Which operated a3 Commands, issued under the roof of Corbin and the influence of his confede- rates, by him while away from tne capital, in the muds of the conflict of Lhe money metropoits, and in a line of duty for the first and oniy time exer- cised, according to‘Mr, Boutweil, a duty reserved to the Secretary of the Treasury, or if uot so reserved by law, then only because there is no law for the authorization of these sale—is 80 extraordinary that we are fully justified in demanding explanations from the President himself. How can we tnvesti- gate the “causes” and leave this pre-eminent tnflu- ence unreveaied? What were “the lights’ beiore the Executive to direct his path amid the devious ways of Wail and Broaa street speculation? How Much Ulumimation was patriotic, how much was selfish? To pursue an investigation to this point, and then, suddenly dropping it, to say, “from tne evidenve which we have we find the President pure,” is equivaient under the circumstauces to say- ing “the Presiden: has a royal prerogative and can do no wrong, aud We will Dot examine inio lis con- duct at all.’ if after this analysis any one still doubts the pro- riety of the drat action of the committee im laying Vhese Matters before the President for explanation ; or if any one doubts the propriety of requesting him Snd the other parties to give their tstimony, we ask that the evidence be read, and all doubt wil vauisn. The people, who are no respecters of persons Where the truth 1s to be shown, would not feel that their Prestdent was treated fairly if such stavements Were allowed tag am record, and no opportunity for him to be beg... Whatever of value this exam- ination has for foture legisiation, one value 1s has not. I¢ has not enabled the commitice wita uni nimity to speak fully of the connection of govern- ment officials with this extraordinary movement in gold. As the examination was in this regard partial, #0 must be the report. In conclusion the minority would respectfully decline to give any certificates of immactfateness to any parties. The resolution under wuich we act does not call for or compel us to do so; and however much {t may be desirable, in many views, we submit our report im that reticence to Which we were en- forced by the conduct of the President and the act of the majority. Tne public may draw its own infer- euces as well from the testimony as from ite absence. We bavenone to draw, and by this state- ment we frankiy say that we make n0 insi or charge. Let the frends ot the Executt lamaged by their zeal in shielding him, be held responsible for our silence. One of the minority, Mr, Cox, desires to add for himself, in clusion, that this investigation has no utility, Unless it informs the public mind of the avsoiute necessity, even through temporary distress, and as the only prevention against the recurrence of such disastrous panics, and further, as the only permanent relief for trade snd commerce and business of all Kinds, that we should return to gold and silver coin. If this 18 not taught by this inv tion, then It has no lesson. The speculation, debauchery, profi- gacy and extravagance incident to suco a situation S wil go OB unui it culminates tn bankruptcy and poverty. 8. 8. COX, Representative Sixth District New York. THOMAS L. JONES, Representative Sixth Districts Kentucky. THE MORDAUNT DIVORCE CASE. Third and Fourth Day's Proceedings Before Lord Penzance and the Jury, Lady Mordaunt’s Condition of Health, Her Habits and Associations. Sir Charles Mordaunt’s Testimony and Statement. The Prince of Wales’ Letters, Ten in Num- ber, to Lady Mordaunt. By the arrival of the European mail of the 19th of February at tnis port yesterday we have the report of the third and fourth day’s proceedings before the London court in the divorce case of Mordauns vs. Mordaunt, with copies of the lettera written by his Royal Highness the Prince of Walea to Lady Mor- daunt. Third Day—February 18. ‘The further hearing of the cause céWébre Mordaunt vs. Mordaunt was resumed this morning, before Lord Penzance and a special jury, on the inguiry as to the aileged insanity of Lady Mordaunt, the re- spondent in the original sait instituted against her by her husband, Sir Charlea Mordaunt, on the ground of her alieged adultery with the co-respondents, Lord Cole and Sir Frederick Jolnstone. ‘The court was even more crowded than on the two previous days. Among tne actendance in the galie- rieg there Was @ considerable number of the reiatives ne Pe gg of the parties Lo the case, including seve- ral ladies. ‘THR TESTIMONY. Additional evidence was adduced on the part of the petitioner, Mrs. Cadogan, wife of the incumbent at Walton; Rev. Mr, Cadogan and the Dowager Lady Mordaunt were examined. ‘Their. testimony consisted princi- pally of matters in reference to Lacy Mordaunt’s stato of mind, the birth of the child, the medical treatment, and so forth. SIR CHARLES MORDAUNT, the husband of Lady Mordaunt, and the petitioner in the original suit “Mordaunot v3. Mordaunt and others,” was the next witness called, and much Interest was taken in his exammation by the crowded attendance in court. Mr. Sergeant Ballautine—You are the busband of the lady about whom we are now carrying on tuis suit? Witneas—I am. Q. Were you acquainted with her for some con- siderable time beiore the marnage? A. 1 was. Q. i understand her marriage took place with the sanction of her parents and friends? A, It did. Q. lL believe there was a sevtlement made in her favor to the extent of some £2,000? A. I should be a to have to go into these matters if itcan be avolded. The Judge said he did not see that it was neces- sary. Mir. Sergeant Ballantine—Very well; I shall not Press the question. Can you teilme what was the date of the marriage? Witness—Tne date is we 6tn December, 1863, Q And from that time until the period of these unhappy occurrences you conitaued to live together, with the exception Of short intervals? A. We did 80. Q. And notbing occurred up to that time to dis- turb the happiness of your married life? A, Wit- ness (WHO appeared deeply allecied and spoke with some dificuity)—Nothing occurred until up tothe ume when { heard of the circumstances out of waich these proceedings lave arisen; our bappi- ness op to that time was unclouded; we had no disagreement, Q. Andi believe] am right in saying you always readily accorded her requests’ A. 1 endeavored to meet her wishes mn every possible way, more espe- cially with regard to the friends and relations Whom she Wished to ask to the house. Q. Vid you interieére with her receiving her former ee after you were married tohert A. 0. Q. Have you heard her speak of Lord Cole and Sir Frederick Johnstone as oid friends? A. I have heard her speak of them as old friends of the family, Q. Did you know tat they were iriends of bers A. I believe so. Q Did you receive any of those gentiemen into your circie afver marriage? A. Yeu. Q. Were you yourself acquainted with any of them before? A. had a stigut acquaintance with Lora Cole and others. Q. Were you aiso aware that the Prince of Wales ‘was ap acquaintance of your wife? A. | was. 4. Had you any personal acquaintance with his Royal Highness? A. | caunot say | knew bim well; 1 had spoken to him, but he was never a Iriend of mine. q. But you were perfectly well aware that he was acqainted with Lady Moruaunt, and upon visiting terms with her famuy? A. Certainly. Q. Did he ever coue to your house on any invita- tion of your own? A. Never on my invitation. Q. Did you ever have conversations with your wife about him? A. Yes. Q. Did you ever express any desire to her tnat she should discontinue any reiation with fus Royal Highness? A. I desired her not to continue her ac- quaintadce with him, Tne Judge—Woat did you say to your wife about not continuing acquaintance with his Royal High- ness? Wituess—1 said { had heard from various quarters certain circumstances, m consequence of which | did not wish her to coounte her acquaint- ance with him, Mr. Serjeant Bailantine—Had he, to your know- ledge, been on one or two occasions to your house? A. I] never saw him there but once. Q. And was itafter this that you expressed this wish to Lady Mordaunt? A, it was. Q. I believe you represented a division of your county in Parliament at the time of your marriage? A. Lrepresented tie southern division of the county (Warwick) for nine years, untli the last dissoluuon of Parliament. That was, I think, up to 1868. 1 was elected in May, 1859. Q. Were you at all aware of the fact until after your wife's confinement tna the Prince bad been & Constant visitor at your house? A. I was not. Were you aware that any written correspon- dence existed between your wife and his Koyal Highness? A. I was not. Q. Were you aware of correspondence having paused between them? A. Sne had never shown me aby Jetters that passed between them, ‘The Judge—Had you no knowledge at all of any correspondence between them? Witness—Not of any correspondence indicating anything. Sergeant Ballantine—Were you aware of letters baying passed vetween them at allt Were you aware, belore your wile’s confinement, that any letters had passed between them? Witness repliea in the negative. "The Judge—Can you say whether you knew that there were any correspondence, however tunocent or sruthtul, between your wife and the Prince? Wit- ness—I knew of nothing up to that time, Mr. Serjeant Ballantine—Supposing the Prince of Waies had been at your house on several occasions when you were attending your duties in the House of Commons or ¢lsewhere, were you made ac quainted with that fact? A. No, excepting once that I saw him at the house. I had heard be had Cajled oftener, but I never saw bim there but once. Q. Have you beard tnat he called frequentiy? A. I have heard that tie called occasionally. qQ. Have you heard that from Lady Mordaunt? A, 0 Q. Did you speak to Lady Mordaunt on the subject after you bad had that communication? A, yes; that Was upon the occasiou | nave aiready men tion- ed, when I warued her uot to continue the acquuin- tanceship. Q. Youremember in November, 1867, Lady Mor- daunt going to London with her maid Jesse Clark. Did you learn what she wauied in London? A. I wished to accompany her, but she said she was going ‘0 shop, and that | would be rather in ber way thao ovberwise. Q. While she was in London aid you receive a letter Irom her? A. 1 did. ‘The letver was here produced and taentified by witness, aad read as follows:— PALAcR Horgn, BUCKINGHAM Gaz, Nov. 6—Friday, MY Dawiine that Twill not b here by the tw train to morrow, but will come by the train which lea Paddington at ‘3:50, if you will send the brougham to meet me, it horribly auil ail by myself not had so much time to-day, een Priestley, and will tell you about it when Your afectiunate wife, HANNAH MORDAUNT. Mr. Sergeant Ballantine then questioned witness as to whether he was aware of Uaptain Parker being a visitor at nis house, or that he was in the habit of meeting Lady Mordaunt. Witness said he was not aware of it at the time. Q. Did your wile ever say one word to you about having met Captain Yarker in Londou? A. Never. e When did she return from sondont A. She recurned the day after that letter was written. Witness was next queattoned as to his visit to Nor- way in the summer of 1868, when Lady Mordaunt declined to accompany him. He went by yacht, in waicu he believed his wife could have made the Journey comfortabiy. Mr. Fag se Ballantine—Why did she aecline to go’ A. She herself med not to wish to go, and Sir Thomas Moncrieffe, her father, objected to oer going; 1 went without her with his consent; 1 Tapged that she should go and stay at Walton Hall within @ week after Lieft; 1 1eft on the 15th of June and returned on the 16th of July; { wrote to and heard from my wife several times duriug ay ab- wence. Q. What had been the state of Lady Mordaunt’s health? A. Her health nad been generaliy good. Q. believe she was occasionally affected by hys- serical distember? A. I have seen her so affected; pas seia these exceptions ner health was generally good, Q. Had you before returning from Norway tele- graphed to your wife, mentioning the day when you expecied to return? A. | did. @ On your return yon went to Waiton Hall and in the reception to show that hg dis} with anyuuing you done } Q. How long fou rewain at Walton? A. U) the 11th of aust ses ter at Did yon sieep with your wife as.usual? A. I Q. When aid you become acquainted witn the fact that she was in the familyqway? A. i cannotremem- ber ner telling me about it. Q. Did the fact of her being in the famtiy way, when it became known to you, excite your suspicion im any way? A. No. In answer to further questions witness stated that after a visit to Scovand in autumn he revurned to Walton Hall, and that in the month of November Sir Frederick Johnstone was a visttor there. r. Sergeant Ballantine—Did some conversation take place between you and your wife about that gentleman? A. 1 had a conversation witi her on ‘We subject previousiy to that, Q. Did she ask you any questions about him? ‘Tell ua What transpired, A. She asked me why Sir Fred. erick Johnstone, @ man of fortae, did not get mar- ried; said Thad heard there was a reason; she pressed me to tell her what it was. 1 was reluctant 40 Say anything about it, nut being pressed furvher I sald I had heard that he had a compiaint which ‘Was likely to prevent bim from marrying. and that if he did it was posaibie it might be conveyed to hia children; the conversation then ceased; about ten days alter that she went to London. Q, Why did she go to London at that time? A. She said it was necessary for her to go and consult Dr, Priestiey previous to her confinement. Were you aware of her having met Sir Fred- erick Jobnstone? A. No; I nad no suspicion about 4$; Thad then no suspicion of her at all with any- ly. Q, Was any arrangement made as to where she shoald be confined? A. She had long said to me “Whenever lam confined J hope you will allow me to be atiended by Dr. Priestley, and arrange that the confinement 8! take place in Loudon; arrange- in abundant time, in accordance @ house was taken in London, but it happened that she was prematurely confined, and Dire yen! the arrangement was not carried ‘out. Q. Did you see her on the nignt of her confine. ment? A, 1 Was not present at the ume; | saw her on the afternoon of the day aiver the confinement, Q. Did you see the child? A. Not at that time; I did not see it for three or four days afcer tne birth. Q. Did you see anything she matter with it? A. The eyes were bad. neariy ciosed up. Q. Did your wife ask you avy questions abont it? A. She asked me whether | had the pirch inserted in the papers; I said 1 had inserted 1 in the Morning Post and the Times, aud she suggested that | shoud Nave 1t inserted in the other papers; sie asked me whether I put the word “prematurely” im the no- tice, and I gaid 1 had done 80; abe afterwards spose to me about the name o1 tne child, and propvsed that the gecona name siould be the name of my mother. Q. There had been nothing to lead you to suppose that there had beea anything wrong in any way? A. Nothing, untiia day or two after her confine- ment, when she said, “Charlie, I have decetyed you— ‘you are not Wbe father of that cuild.?” Q. Did you at the time give belief to that observa- tlouf A. No; thought it an observation made in fougreanence of some !ilness arising out of her con- fiement; she repeated the same statement on sub- sequent Occasions, although perhaps not quite in the same words, Q. Was there anything to indicate that her mind Was wandering at that ume? A. i could see no- thing. Examination continued—I saw her on the evenin, of tue 6th of March; she looked distressed; I asked her, a3 I did on severa! Occasions, what caused her distress, but I did not receive any defiaite answer; [ saw ler again in her room on the sth of Marcn,when her nurse, Mrs, Hancocs, was with her; sue sent for me on that occasion, and when | came she cried; she began to 6/@ak and then burst into tears. Q. Tell us what she said? A, She first sald, “Char- le, you are not the father of that chiul; Lord Cole a8 the father of the enild;” It was about @ quarter of hour before she spoke again; she then said, harii¢, 1 have been very wicked; I have done very wrong; I said, “With whom?” and she answered, “Witn Lord Cole, Sir Frederick Jobustone, the Prince of Wales and otners, ofien and in the opea day,” (Sengation in court.) Q. You nave said that you did not credit what she said on the subject on former occasious; was there anything on this occasion to indicate Uilat she was under aby detusion? A. No; she spol ith Lhe deep- est distress, aud I think with remorse. Q. Did you make apy replyY A. 1 made no repiy. Q. How was it you made no reply? Did you be- lieve the stavewent? A. Icannot say that | entirely betleved the statement at that ting; 1 pad sus- picions. Examination continued—Subsequently I had con- Versations with the nurse and also with Mrs. Oado- gau, and | made certain inquiries; Lady Louisa (Moucreife) came down avout tue @ larch; I wh of cominunicuted to her what her daughter had stated; she rematned at the = gos in communication with her daughter after thal ume; [left the nouse about the 4sn of April; the last time I saw my wie was on tue 24th of March, Daving Many days there without seeing her during that time | found some hotel a number of letters of the Prince of Wales, and some flowers and verses in aa envelope; 1 found them in @ small deak in my wife's boudoir; obtained them through the instrumentality of the maid; the letters of the Prince of Wales were in a separate en: be termed a valeatine; on the envelope contatnin, Unis valentine there was & memorandum in pencil, showing thatit had arrived previously to our mar- riage; 1t was Lady Mordaunt’s handwriit.og that Appears outside, aud along with the valentine inside there were some flowers, The envelope and its contents were here produced and identified by witness. Mr. Sergeant Ballantine—These and the letters of the Prince of Wales were in the same envelope? Tue Judge—We have not come to that. ‘here is nothing here to connect abyining with tne Prince of ‘ales. Mr. Sargeant Ballantine (to. witness)—These are the letters so found’ Witness—Yes, Will it be neces- sary for me Ww read them (tbe letters being in wit ness’ hand for identification)? Q. No, not atall, There was also a handkerchief found in the desk? A. Yes. Examimation continued—In a conversation with Lady Mordaunt I said wo her she must know that alter What soe toid me suspicion might rest unjustly On some of those friends who visited us, and that [ wished them to be clear of any stain; | mentioned the nanies of several friends who had been staying with ua, id she 10st emphatically cleared them all except two; the name of a near relative was mentioned, and she declined to answer in one way or snotner in relation to him; I subse- quently found 4 letter from that gentleman, and itis inthe bands of my solicitors; my wife desired me to continue intercourse Wits her; she did so oftener thau once; she said, “Charte, { wish you to come to ine a8 usual;” | declined; 1 never had any furtuer intercourse with her. Q. Was she during this time in her right senses? A. I think she was in her rigat senses. Q, Have you any doubt on your mina upon the Bubject? A, J have no doubt. Q. Look at this hovel bill; do you see an endorse- ment on the back? A. that {6 my wife’s haudwrit- ing. a ‘The Judge—That is one you found in the desk? A. e3. Sergeant Ballentine—The other is the Palace lbilly A. Yes. be Judge—These were all found in the desk? A. Yes; she was staying at Belgrave equare tie day after she letc Walton, at the house of the Dowager Lady C., and I received a letter. The letter waa produced and read. It stated that no doubt the recipient would be surprised to hear from her. She was not very well, and had seen Oxford; and, though somewhat beter, was still un- comfortavie. She then went on to speak of what she was doing and who had called, and also of ‘Lina’s wedding” and the presents that ought to be given her. She was afraid that it would not be much, on account of J. M. Bradiord’s death, and for the same reason theught they would not go out much tat season. Witness—~1 was in Scotland at the time I received that letter; I bad had, no communication with my wife since I left Waiton, and I did not answer the letter. Mr. Sergeant Balfantine—I propore to ask when he heard the first suggestion of insanity. The Judge—I think 1t can be put. Witness—As far as I know J bad not heard it before Sir Thomas came to Walton; | belicve be told me. Mr. Sergeant Ballantine—Did you near it from any- body before Sir Thomas? A. No; J had many con- versetions with Lady Moncreife and Mrs. Forbes betore Sir Thomas came down; | was under the iin. pression that ne did not see my wile, but from lnguiries L iound that be was wits her for a few munutes. ‘ By Dr. Deane—i did not go to Norway in the sum- mer of 1867; from the time of my marriage to 1868 my wife often consuited Dr. Priestle; can’t say I kuow for what compiaiat precigeiy; { think it was something connected with ulceration of the womb; she told me sane suffered trom uiceration of the womb; Sir fhomas’ ovjection to my going to Nor- way Was uot on account of my wile’s health; he said the accommodation for ladies was not good; he consented to iny going without her; her rem: ing at home had nothing to do with her health; my wife went back teu days after | left; I belive that Lady Mordaunt’s sister, Miss Frances, and Miss Cotte, a very intimate iriend, were at the honse on the 26th of June; at the time J ieft inJune I understood from my wife that one of Ler sisters, Miss Frances, was conditionally engaged to Viscount Cole, but that Lord Cole's father's consent could not be obtained; there was great intimacy between my wife and Lord Coie’s family; | cunaot give the date when I saw the Prince of Wales. By tne Judge—Three weeks before I went to Nor- way; I recollect the occasion; | was tired and lyin onthe bed, and the witness Bird said nis Roy Higuness was ip the bouse and 1 weou down aud saw him. Cross-examiuation continued—I found other letters in the desk; some are irom Lord Newport and Mr. George Forbes, By the Judge—Before you asw the Prince of Wales in tae drawing-room, vad you told your wile not to receive bis visita? A. No; it was after this, and be- fore my going to Norway, that I told my wife not to receive his visite; it was, a8 near a8 1 can tell, avout three weeks betore. by Dr. Dean sionally, but not frequently; J knew that his Royal Highuess was an intimate friend of the Mon- oreiffes; she had she ponies in November or December, i867; [ did not buy them of the Prince of Wales, but they were bought of the Prince of Wales’ coachman by me; these are the ponics Ghe used to urive: 1 never visited the Prince of was aware that he came occa- but I cannot whether Yon of the Prince of Wi 1868; 1 sew the in at the Prince of Wales’ my wile was confined on the 28th of Febraary; { slept witn her regulariy up to the time of the con- finement; 1 think it was rather longer than @ fort- night alter ber confinement that | had the conversa. tion with her to which I have alluded; it was when she was convalescent: Lady Louisa Moncrelm was in the house at the time; 18 was during her second visit; Orford and Jones did not suggest Wo me that she was out of her mind; Dr. Jones sald that she Was Very silent, but did not say that her mind was affected; | called in Dr, Jones because the frat time Theard these statements | coulda not beleve to ber gntit, and i thought that it must proceed from some irregularity or irom ier conttuement; Dr. Orford rex commended that Isbould caliin br. Jones, but not, ier as I cau say, to inguire Into the state of her ind. By the Judge—I was moat unwilling to believe in her gunt, and believed that the state of ner bodily beaith bad affected her mind; for that reason Dr. Oriord advised Dr, Jones vo be called in; | have seen her crying. Q. Do you know the meaning of hysterical? A. I believe that when wen ery it ts not called hysterics, but Whea Women do tt is. (Lauguter.) I may have said that sne was hysterical; 1 do not know what hysterical catalepay is; | remarked to Dr. Jones that at Wines #ne Was Very silent and Dr. Joues sala “thal 4S @ state I can pest describe by the words mental or hysterical catalepsy.”” pr. Deane read a letter from Walton Hall, dated ugust &, Which was recognized by ine Witness a one he bad written to Lady Louisa, im wich he said:—Harriet has not becu quite so weil since [ jast wrote, having been hysterical, nervous aod excitabie; but without any jever,” and adding that “the least excitement puts her into the state f have Gescribed.” Another letter, written by Sir Cuarien on the 10th, from Walton Hall, said:—"Sne las nervous attacks, darlug which her mind wanders and added, “itis difficuit to get her to un- derstand what is said to her, and she appears to have forgotten all avout the baby.'” . Dr. Deane—Does that describe her state at the time’you wrote the letter? A, Yes; at the ume I wrote those letters | was not thoroughiy convinced See wullt; 1 clung tw the last hope as loug as pos- sible, Dr. Deane—What do you mean by stating that she id Dervous attacks duriaog wuich her mind wan- ed and it was dificult to get her to understand? A, I considered her mind wandered because she said those things to me which I was unwiling to believe, and did not believe at that time; sue ap- besred not to understand sometimes, and she seemed Lo me not to take notice of the baby. Dr. Deane read another Jetter, dated the following day, from sir Charles, in which he sald:—‘i am very sorry 1 cagnov give a better account of Harr does not recover #0 quickly a3 sue ought, She far stroug that sie is weil enough, lle doctors say, o get up; but her nervous syslein is so prostrate: that We cannot get her to do 80, or to take food, and she seldom understands what is said to her, The baby has been several times brought to her. but she only noticed it for a moment, and valid 1b was to be taken away, 1 am very anxious and distressed about her, bus feet quite sure Jones understands her case, a8 He Bays Lat he bas seen Mauy smniiar.”” Witness being asked to explain the letter repeated that it was writen at & ume when he was unwilling, without further evidence, to beileve woat he bad beard from ber; be had mentioned that ene bad mude extraordinary statements to bun to Dr, Jones at the ume he wrote tue letters. in another Jetier to Lady Louisa Sir Charles —My dariug Harries remains much we 2; she takes more food and sieeps very well, Dut quiet, without speaking or undersianding a@nythiog that is said to her. Sue is out of bed and ia the sitting room, and we hav done all we could to rouse her from her apatuetic state. The doctors say Its enurely hysteric.’? Dr, Deane—slay | take it Uiat at that time Lady Mordsunt Was in an apathetic state? Wiiness—She was at thas time very silent. By Mir. sergeant Ballanune—Lucre were no indica- ios that Would lead we to think that my wife's mind Was Wandering except her stateuicuts as to men; 1 wrote to Lady Moncreiffe; 1 found these documents, a8 nearly asi can recollect, the day aiter my last letier to her; after that ume dirs. Forbes Wrote, and on the 17s Lady Louisa came down; Lord Newport was one of tue persous whom Lasked my wife about; she said, “i will not say anything about Newport one way or the*otuer; | went Ww @ ball at Abergeldie; believed the Princess a8 well as the Prince were staying there at Lhe tine, ihe entry im tne diary (produced) 18 1n any wife's haudwriting. The Judgé—Was that also in the desk? Wicness—No; 1 found it iu the waveiling bag the same day I found the letters iu the desk; I did not enter into {uti particulars with wwe doctors; I told Dr. Orford | was afraid, on account of Lady Mor- daunv’s great silence, that at umes there was some- thing on her mind that caused her great alstress, and toat { was afraid it migut burt her oeaith. At this stage ol the proceedings it was suggested by Lord Penzance that the court should adjourn; but before doing so be wished to say that tt had been in- Uumated to him that nis Koyal Highness the Prince of Wales had been sudpwnaed as @ witness on be- balf of Bir Charles Mordauut. If so, the convent- euce of his Royal Highvess should be consulted. The Prince, he understood, had expressed bia wil- Mnguess to attend. Mr. Sergeant Ballantine said be was extremely surprised, ashe had been told that the Prince was Rot and would not be subpoenaed. That. intimation Was given at his (Mr. Sergeant Ballantine's) desire at the commencement of the suit. The Prince bad not been subpenaed at his desire. ‘Ihe Judge—Then I am wrong in supposing his Royal Highness was subpoenaed y Mr. Sergeant Ballantine—Certainly, my lord. ‘Whe court then adjourned. The Prince of Walew Letters, ‘The following jetters from the Prince of Wailea were put in, but not read. They are, however, printed, a8 follows:— ’4 Lynn, Jan. 13, 1867, st—1 am quite shocked never to have anawered your kind lesser, written some time ago, and for the “very pretty iwulfetees, which are very’ useful this cold weather. 1 bad no ideu where you had been staying since your marriage, but Francis Knollys told me that you are {n Warwickshire. T suppose you will be up in London for the opening of Par. Hiament, when I hope I may periaps have the pieasure of seeing you and of making the acquaintance of Sir Charles. I was in London for only two nights and returned here Satur- day. The rails wore so «ippery that we thought we should never arrive here. ‘There has been a heavy {all of snow here, and we are able to use our sledges, which 1s capital fun. Be: Heve me yours ever sincerely, ALBSKY EDWARD. Monpar. My Drax Lapy Monpauxt—I am sure you will be giad to hear thatthe Princess was safely delivered of « litte girl and that both are doing very well, I hove you 0 the Oswald and St James? Hail this week, 1d, Tain sure, be no harm’ your remaining till Sut- urday in town. I shall’ like to soe you again. Ever yours, moat slucerely ALBERT EDWARD. MARLNOROUGI HOUSE, May 27, 1967. My Dear Lapy MonpauNt—Many thanks for your ietter, and I am very sorry that I should have given you so much trouble looking for the ladies’ umbrella for ine at I am very giad to hear that you enjoyed your stay th I shail be going there on Friday next, and as the /rincess is 80 much better shall hope to remain’ a week there. If there tunity of making the acquaintance of your husand, Be- Neve me, yours very alacerely, ALBERT EDWARD. MARIOROvOH House, Oct, 18. My Drax Lapy Monpav: kind letter, which I received just and Thave been ao busy here that 1 have be answer it belore. Iam glad to bear that you tog at Waitoa, and hope your by whurthe partrliges. We fiad« charming 2 from the 19h of September tothe 7th of this mouth. Our party conaisted of the Sandwich, Grosvenors (ouly for afew days), Sumners, Kakers, F. Marshall, Alrud, Konald Gower, sie Pally Olivet who ‘did net Jook so bad ina Kilt as ou heard; Lascelles, Faikiner and Sam looked frat rate in bi gs; my total was twenty-one. much for your photo; and I received accompanied by a charming epiat sro rather bard on the young lady, un, ratty, she is very Dice looking, has chi frvery popular’ with e arming manners, and one. From his letter he seems to be very much {n fove—a rare occurrence nowadays. I wii see what I can do in geiting = presentation for theson of Mra. Bradshaw for the Koyal Asylum of London, Bt. Ann's Society, Francis will (oll you result. London ts very empty, but 1 have plenty to do, so time does not go slowly, and I go ‘down shooting to Windsor and Richmond doeasio 26th Ts 1 shoot with General Hall at Newine and then at Windsor Pwe 4o abroad. This will probably be on the 18th or 19th of noxt month. ‘You told me when | iast saw Zou that you were, probably goiny to Paris in November, ib T suppose you have given it up. Leaw by the tbat you were in London on Saturuay. me know, as I would have made ® point of call are some’ good plays going on, h rounas of them. 'y brother is month he two years. Now I shall say bly we may have u chance of see: remain, yours, most slacerely, you ae Mr Drat Lapy Moxnavw’ whiob I received this ino! moment the exact think they are just under fourtee: know for certain I shall not fait to le. you know, would be @aly too happy if they wilt ‘ult you and have the pleasure of seeing them a your bands. It is quite an age since I have seen or heard anythiog of you, but I trust yon had a pleasant tripabroad, and 1 nuppose you have been in Scotland since. Lord Derby bas kindly aakea me to shoot with him at Buck- eaham on the ®t of next, mouth, and T hope I may, perhaps, we the pleasure of secing you ‘here. /@ me, yours erat aluceday, yon SRUBERT EDWARD. SANDRINGUAM, King’s Ly Nov. 30. My Drag Lavy MorpauNt—I was very glad to hear from Colonel Kingecote the uther day that you had bought my two ponies. 1also trust that they will suit you, and that you willdrive them for taany e year, (1 bave never driven them” myself, 20 I don't know whether (hey are easy wo or not. 1 hope you bave bad some huni tithough the ground isso hard that in some parte of te Country, it ie guive stopped. We bad our Grit shoo party this week, and got #09 head one day. and 3 wood Socks. Next week the great Oliver 1 coming. He and biandford had thought of going to Algiers, but they given itup, and J don’t know to what foreign clime foing to Getake thernseives, I saw fe, 'and { ought her looking very well am eo that yon won't be at Buckenbam when 1 go Such an age siuce T have seen Tr there's anything else (besides horses) that I can do for you please let me know, and I remain, yours, ever sincerely, ALBERT EDWARD. al NOMAM, King’ My Dean Lavy Monpaunt—Many which I received this eventny that you like the ponies ; before you attempt to drive them, ‘They belonged originally to the’ Princess M thom for some yenrs, and when she mi hot wanting therm just then, f bought them from her. | am not surprtt ‘hat you have had no bunting lately, os tbe frost bas made the ground as Sard tron, We ho} . ever, to be able to bunt to-morrow, aaa thaw bas vet ha fe Wako. My Drar Lavy Mogpavyr—-I am to audrey the letter that I recesved trou you this morn: ua. well, and that I shall not be able to pay yor a Which Thad been looking forward wi ‘morrow and. Saturday 1 shalt be hunting (oN shire;"but f'you are att im towne tay Teetae to after ‘and Beyuura 2 cpu gesture feve me, ‘er sincel * youre CUBERT BROWARD. SUNDarY. Mr Deas Lavy MorpaunT—I cannot tell you how. frossed 1 am to hear frow your letter that you hare got = nee and Chat lL i ‘n condequence Dot walt jou, are had the m} a rir sud T kiow what w iresome complaiut 1 fa reat care of vourself and have & good iY ede 3eh Be a Se i ‘ppose you forced ther fe vel) favorable for "7 wean EDWARD. "ater trust you will ta 7 SuNDay. My DrAR Lapy Moxpanxr—o ‘tind Wer. Tama a0 sad. te Oe vO, Pere pans a recovery, and to be abie to ‘Hastt which Is sure to do you a great deal Trope cry good, haps on your returrn to London I may have th Balleve me yours, verg slaecean” ot eeag Yeas ALBERT EDWARD. BANDRINGHAM, F'txa"s A Pe Mx Drae Lapy MOBDAUMEAI mum sntiigle Ter bet daving answered your last kind letter, but my theaks for it aow? Slace the lth I have been bere at bs ay house, re ty arn on on" ve shooting. ‘the Duke” of Cambridge, Lord Lord Alfred Pagel” Lo ieee. Coapiie, es the jor Grey and tr mpose arty, eeivreaale crrived ier hasan but he fe bys Hinguished abot. Shr Frederiok, Johnstone tale ing wi ou to-morrow for can give you the best account of ts. ‘This afternoon, after shooting, I retara to London, and to-morrow night the Princess, our three eldest children and myself, start for Paris, where we shall remains week, and Sos aes to Copenhagen, where mi of ADAPT) aati go to Venfce, and and uy ee ee a ee st tinople, an ome: ts thal be back af ore Aprile t ack again before Api , therefore, i sball Rot tee youfor @ long time, but trust to ‘And you, fe London om our return, If you should have tine iCall ep very kind to write me sor en rs to Marlborough House, to be torwaried, will always reach me, I hope will retaain strong and well, and, wishing yous very sant wintar, { remain, yours moat sincerely ALBERT EDWABD. Fourth Day’s Proceedings. Lonpon, Feb, 19—Evening. In the case of Mordaunt against Mordaunt this morning Sergeant Ballantine asked bis Lordship the Judge if ne would allow him to read @ letter which he bad addressed to his solicttor, showing that tt was expressly his desire that the Prince of Wales should not be subpmnaed, Lord Penzance said this was not necessary. Henry Bird, the butier at Walton Hail, said that he had been in the family of the Mordaunts for nearly thirty years; knew Captain Farquhar, Lord Cole and Sir Frederick Johnstone as having visited Walton Hall; accompanied Sir Charles and Lady Mordaunt to Scotland tn 1567; Captain Farquhar was there and Was often with Lady Mordaunt; noticed tat they were very much together subsequently in September, at Walton Hall, in her ladysbip’s sitting room: the Caplain was generally aione with her, sir ries being out shooting; after ly Mordaunt’s return from town in November Jessie Clark made a communication and showed the letter; it would be about ten days after; the letter was in Captain Farquhar’s handwriting; I read the letter, and gave It to Jessie Vlark; it was dated from the Tower, and said:;—‘Darling, I have got home very tired; J have seen the Morning Post, and ain glad to see they have inserted my name as Farmer; had,Charite seen It as Farquhar, he would have been suspictous;’’ something was said about going to the play; be did not think Clark made any statement to me as to where she found that letter; be got a Morning Pust—November 9, 1867; my master took in the paper, and I put aside two copies; on the 7th, among the arrivals at the Palace Hotes, Buckingham gate, is Lady Charles Mordaunt, and, on the 9th, Captain Farmer; in January, 1868, Cap- tain Farguhar again visited Walton and stayed ten Oays; he did not notice so much intimacy there, as there were otner visitors; tn London, in the autuma of 1868, wnile Sir Charles was shooting, witness wens into the biiliard room saw Lady Mordaunt and Captain Farquhar standing close together; they seemed startled, and were jost about gomg away from each other when witness way; during the seasons of 1867 and 1865 the Prince of Wales calied there—more frequently in 1868; he remembered bim coming twice in the afternoon, and staying from one to two hours; witness received his Royal Hi ness; Sir Charlea, on these occasions, was at House of Commons or Out shooting; Wiiness re~ ceived instructions not to admit any one else when the Prince came; aiter Sir Charles left for Norway— either in the same week that he went or the week following—his Royal Highness came to luncheon; witness remembered @ supper party; @ lady and entieman and his Royal Highness were with Lady lordaunt, the lady and gentleman went away, but his Royal (lighness stayed with Lady Mordaunt about twenty minutes; in the season of 1564 Lord Cole used to come more frequently after Sir Charles wept to Norway; when Sir Charles was in London Lord Cole used to come more fre- quently while he was not in the bouse; on the 27th vune there was a dinner party of four; except Mordaunt and Lord Cole, the rest of the party went away; he remained with Lady Mordaunt in t drawing room; he left about @ quarter to one o'clock; witness kuew this by hearing the door bang and by then seeing that Lord Cole's bat and coat were gone; on the 10th July Lord Cole went down to Waiton and stayed there till Sir Charles arrived; Sir Frederick Jonnstone also visited them, and was olten alone with Lady Mordaunt in her boudoir; witness was at Walton after her ladysbip’s confinement; he bad conversations when her ladyship had given fim instructions abous the carriage, &c.; until he left with Sir Charies in April she seemed to talk very rationally; on the 25th of August he went down to Woking and saw Lady Mordaunt; she caine down stairs; Lusked ber how she was, and toid her that Sir Charles had gone to Scotland; she conversed rationally; reference was made to the death of Mr. Arthur Smith. and her ladysnip said how much he would be missed; the interview lasted about seven minutes, and Mordaunt seemed to know perfectiy what she was saying. Cross-examined by Mr. Archibald—I stayed at Bickiey some weeks; Lady Mordaunt seemed more Absent, and conversed at times only as she used to do; saw her about the house at ten or eleven o'clock at night; once she came into my bedroom in her night dress, and was taken away aguin; | asked her next morning if sie recollectea when she came, and she said ‘Yes, it was @ mistake;’’ I should say, of course, that If she wasin her right mind she would not come there; this happened about the 24th or 28th of September, I believe; I thought sometimes she was “shaming,” as she wandered about the house and through the passages and halls; 1 put tue copies of the Morning Post aside, in consequence of what the maid told me, and I toid Mr. Haynes about the papers two or three weeks before going to Scot laod; I mentioned the letter in May or June; I did not mention the letter before lest it should compro- mise Clark In her situation; I wrote to Ulark about the letter before he mentioned tt. Re-examined by Sergeant Ballantine—He men- tioned the letter to Mr. Haynes after receiving 8 re- ply irom Clark; she was afraid that reading the let- ter and showing it to me might prevent ner getting another piace; 1 wanted to take & copy of it, but she would not let me; 1t was between ten and eleven o'clock at night when Lady Mordaunt came to my room; she Was in her night dress; I was writing, and said, ‘‘Way are you here?” she laughed, aod the maid came, and ane went away; next day when 1 asked her she seemed to understand me perfect! her acts would, If she had no motive, induce me to tuink her insane, but with a motive I should beleve her shamming; I have not fully made up my mind on that point; there were no acts of the kind done by ber ladyship while at Walton. Alfred isrett said suat in 1867 1¢ was his duty to enter the arrivals at the Palace Hotel; on the 7tb of Novemper Lady Mordaunt arrived at the hotel; the entry is in my writing; | made the entry “Captam Farmer,” [found out afterwards bis name was Farquhar and scratched out the frst name end in- serted Farquhar; I did not Ond it out before the evening; | made the alteration the same evening that I found it out. Cross-examined by Dr. Deane—I believe I noticed the right name on the portemonnie and made the alteration that evening; tae aMidavit produced is mine. (This stated, the witness could not aay when he altered the name or how he came to know of it.) Frederick Jounson—I was footman to Sir C. Mor- daunt from May, 1867, t0 May, 1868; during the shoot- ing season I noticed an intimacy between Captain Farquhar and Lady Mordaunt; early in the autumn of 1867 @ note came to Walton Hall and I had jon to go into Lady Mordaunt’s boudoir; | found Captain Farquhar there with her ladyship; I did not knock, and Lady Mordaunt said I ought not wo come in without Knocking; in Febraary, 1868, I came to town with her ladyship, on s visit to Lady Kinnould’s; they went to the Alhambra and left when the performance was over at about ten o’ciock; I have posted letters from her ladyship w Me sear Farquhar, and! have de- livered one personally; that was on this occasion; I Was in town with Sir Charles during tue season of 1867; bis Royal Highness ca!led once when I was st the hall; (have seen bim calling upon her isdysnip at Lady Kinnould’s; he stayed from five to ten minutes to seven; I have taken two letters from Mordaunt to Marlborough House for the Prince ‘ales and bave posted others. Cros-examined by Mr. archibald—On the retarn from the Ajhawbra i put down Captain Farqunar at St. James street; have posted many ietters te gen- Uemen from Lady Mordaunt; whea the Prince of Wales called at Lady Kinnouid’s Lady Mordaunt had t better of her illness; sue had been confined to jer room. Re-examined—I have taken two letters, possibly three, to beng ne and have posted tures others, witiin (uree days, ‘The witness reterred toa diary, which Lord Pen- zance immediately asked for. Whea asked when it Waa written he said, ‘‘Laat nighs and to-day. It was partly copied from a dairy he bad at come and paruy from recollection. '” Reexamination continued—With regard to the letters, 1 am quite sure the greater part of them were written during the visit (0 Beigravé square. Sergeant Ballentin: 18 Ro! ighness says fe hes no and consequent cannot ask for Ty thee tome farth dence the inquiry was a+ Journed till Wednesd \ § ‘