THE DILKE SCANDAL.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1480, 16 March 1886, Page 3

THE DILKE SCANDAL.

The trial of the divorce case, Donald Crawford against his wife and Dilke, corespondent, began in London on February 12th. The Court room was crcwded. Sir C. Dilke arrived early, and took a seat without being recognised by most people present. On the case being announced petitioner’s counsel stated the first intimation his client had of bis wife’s unfaithfulness was by receipt of several anonymous letters, the writer of which warned Mr Crawford to “ beware of the member from Chelsea ” (Dilke). Receiving further anonymous letters, Mr Crawford taxed hia wife with infidelity. She admitted her guilt, and said she had remained two evenings with Mr Dilke. His attentions to her, she said, had commenced directly after her marriage. He professed to admire her because of her mother. The wife of petitioner attributed the anonymous letters to the vindictiveness of her mother. Petitioner’s case rested solely oh the wife’s confession. The petitioner, Mr Crawford, gave testimony supporting the statements of bis counsel. Ho said he was startled by hia wife asking him whether he would forgive her if she had been unfaithful. His wife’s sisters had been shown the anonymous letters, and agreed they were in the handwriting of their mother. Counsel for the petitioner submitted evidence against Mrs Crawford, but submitted none against Sir C, Dilke. The Court granted Mr Crawford a divorce, and dismissed the charges against Sir C. Dilke. Although Sir C. Dilke escaped under a technical plea that Mrs Crawford’s unsworn confession was insufficient evidence, the whole tenor of the trial has produced (according to the Despatch) profound and universal conviction of hia guilt. The concensus of opinion is that the revelations made in the trial, and tho'failure to attempt either to deny or disprove the charges against him, has practically ruined Sir 0. Dilke politically.