LORD ALFRED DOUGLAS.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1719, 9 April 1913, Page 10

LORD ALFRED DOUGLAS.

$ CHARGE OF,CRIMINAL LIBEL. POSTCARDS TO lIIS FATHER-IN-LAW Lord Alfred Bruce Douglas, a son of the late ■ Marquis of Queensberry, and well known for some years as editor of "Tlio Academy," was summoned ,beforo Mr. Demnau at 'Marlborough Street. Police Court, London, on February 25, charged with having, on February 14, unlawfully and maliciously published a certain defamatory libel concerning Colonel Frederic Hambleton Custance, his father-in-law. Mr. If. D. Mtiir (instructed by Sir George Lewis) appeared for the complainant; Mr. Cecil Hayes, (instructed , by -Messrs. J. J'. Edwards and Co.) was for the_ defence. Mr. Muir said the complainant . was Colonel Frederic Custance, C.8., formerly lieutenant-colonel in the Grenadier Guards and now resident at Weston Hall, ileal" Norwich. His daughter, Olive Eleanor, his sole surviving child, married the defendant, Lord Alfred Douglas, in 1902, and they had now one son, Raymond, about ten year's of age. There was no ■ settlement on the marriage, but in November 1910 two settlements were entered into between Lady Alfred Douglas ami her father. Colonel Custance, examined, said that in November, 1910, a settlement was executed anil afterwards he received from Lord Alfred Douglas a number of letter:), as the result oi' which, in November, 1911, ho refused to open any more and wrote to the .defendant to tliat effect. Since then, he had received from the defendant a number of telegrams and postcards. ■•' ' The witness then identified as in the defendant's handwriting a number of communications which he had received signed "Alfred Douglas." The first was a telegram dated February 13, 1913: "There is no doubt that Olive was induced to sign settlement by fraudulent promise of consideration which is now toeing withheld from her.- Am seeing lawyer this afternoon. The whole matter will have to be fought out in public law courts." This was followed next day by anothel telegram and three post-cards making definite charges against the complainant (repeated in a subsequent letter printed below), describing him as "a despicable scoundrel and thoroughly dishonest and dishonourable man," stating that his "word of honour was absolutely valueless." "I write these cards," the last of the post-cards said, "in the hope that you will proceed against nic for libel, when' I will justify and show you up beforo the world." In cross-examination, the Witness said | there had been disputes between.him and his daughter, but not for more than two or three years. . Sir Reginald Custance, K.C.8., of Half Moon Street, Piccadilly, giving evidence, said ho received the following letter:—. 20 Church Row, Ilampst,eail, February 13, .1913. ' Dear Sir Reginald-Here aro sonic facts for your consideration; 1. Colonel Custance had .£30,000 with his wife when she married liim. It is now only £20,000, £10,000 having disappeared lor unexplained reason. 2. Mrs. Custance made no will, so the colonel got all the money slio inherited from Mrs. Joliffo and the liouso in Cranky Place. 3. Tlio AVestern estate and a sum of £15,000 was entailed on Olive, -nd Colonel Custance had no power to dispossess her of the absoluto. inheritance of this in fee simple at his death. . . •i. Colonel Custance asked Olive to agree to a settlement of the Weston property and the £15,000 oil our boy Raymond; in return for which ho undertook to pay her the sum of £000 a year during his lite, and to leave her the life interest in her mother's money. 5. olive aureed to this, oiul signed the settlement. G. Colonel Custance refused sign Riiy agreement about t'hc £000, saying thai his word of honour to pay it was suiii7. At the same time lie made a friendly agreement with me that if 1 would allow him to have the custody of my boy and allow the boy to make Weston his principal home lie would undertake at; tile expenses of his keep and education. S. Finding that under this later arrangement my boy was sullenng nMiciilth and in character, and that 1 scarcely saw him, and exercising my nndmib.eil and obvious right, 1 terminated this arrangement; that is to say, 1 gave m.tiee to' Colonel Custance that in 'uturc I should provide for the bo.v i entirely myself, and tlial the boy would reside yilh mo in the holidays and go to such school as 1 decided to send him to. !). Colonel Custance (lien says: 'If- yen take your son out of my custody 1 shall stop inv daughter's allowance, . and leave her without a penny." , * .- That is a plain, bald statement of the facts, which cannot be disputed rr denied. I put it to you tiiiit a man vim behaves ill'such a way is. a despicable scoundrel, a rogue, and a man without honesty or honour. 1 decline to believe that, now you are ill possession of the facts, you will think it mlit or decent to support Colonel Custanco in his attitude. For my part my altitude is clear. I have taken away my boy irom the contamination of associating with Ibis blackguard, and 1 will never under i:ny circumstances allow Colonel Ciistanc- to see the bay again. In addition to this. I shall steadily proceed to take such steps as will compel

Colonel Custance to defend his character in the LaV Courts from the public and ; repeated attacks I shall, make on it. , I shall continue to call him a so'undrel and thief in every tort of public way, such as sending him telegrams and post cards to his house and.his clubs, and cir- ] dilating a pamphlet among Ms friends, V relatives, and tho tenants o:n his pro- - perty. Everything I say I shall ba preoared to justify up to the hilt, and I ; shall go on till I goad him into (akin? action, when ho will get such a showing ■' up as will make the name cf Custance stink in the nostrils of every decent person in,the land.—Believe me, yours very truly, , . ALFRED DOUGLAS. In answer to the charge the defendant said: I merely wish to say I took this step very deliberately, after very mature consideration, as the only means of putting an. end to an intolerable' position which had been created by Colonel Custance. Colonel Custance lias desired for a long time to obtain absolute'possession of my t•• child. When ultimately I took tho child out of his custody and definitely informed him I did not propose to allow t.lio child to reside with him for the future ho'determined to revenge liiir self on mo by breaking up my married life and depriving me of tho custody of ray wife, with whom 1 liavc alwuyi lived on terms ' of the deepest all'ection and devotion. The defendant.was formally committed for trial and liberated oil his own rccog- „ nisanccs of .£IOO.