The Campbell divorce case : copious report of the trial / With numerous portraits of those concerned drawn from life by Harold Furniss.

Date:
1887
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: The Campbell divorce case : copious report of the trial / With numerous portraits of those concerned drawn from life by Harold Furniss. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by Royal College of Physicians, London. The original may be consulted at Royal College of Physicians, London.

    11/160
    suggest that it would be better for the learned counsel simply to state at present what Lady Miles would prove. Sir Charles Russell held that he would be entirely within his right in reading the letter, if he insisted, but he at once deferred to his lordship’s suggestion, and would content himself with saying that Lady Colin in that letter repeats the painful story of her married life. How her affection for his lordship had kept her with him, how she had endeavoured to be a friend and a nurse to him, but she could not continue, under such conditions, to be forced to submit to his embraces. To her letter Lord Colin wrote a reply. The letter was dated February, 26, 1883. In it Lord Colin said the operation to which he had been subjected was a failure. Mr. Propert had told him, or given him to understand, that marriage was not a good thing for him, and she knew that to her no harm would come from her marriage with him. There was nothing the matter with him that could affect her in the slightest degree. She might believe him when he told her that Mr.. Pro- pert was asked this, and had said simply, “ not the slightest.” He added that he had the right to tell her that on his account they could not live together immediately. It was very hard to tell her that, but it was the right thing to do. He had always been very sensitive about it himself, knowing what might and would be said if it got out. The doctors never told him to take precautions; that had been simply owing to his own nervousness. He believed it not unnatural, seeing the uncertainty about the wound. From this the jury would see that Lord Colin, whatever the reason, did think his condition was such that, as a matter of precaution, his wife should take measures to prevent possible con- sequences. The letter of Lord Colin continued : He said he did not wish to allude to the subject any more in her present frame of mind, as it might be useless to do so. He hoped his wife was not going to fasten the terrible wTrong upon him—namely, that he was not fit to lead a married life. She must know that fistula was a common com plaint, and one which hundreds of men and women had, and which was never dreamt of as an excuse for what she had done in the determination she had come to. This letter was signed “Affectionate husband.” The serious point here to be dealt with was that Lord Colin had stated that he was suffering from fistula. Lord Colin as a young man had suffered seriously from a certain disease. That disease was either originally of peculiar virulence or else it became so by neglect; and the result was that when the disease had passed its active stage it left behind it severe effects* which at times affected the health of the sufferer. Inflammation set in with the result that a perineal fistula was formed. Having remarked upon the distressing nature of the duty which compelled him to lay these matters before the jury, Sir Charles Russell went on to say that the state of affairs being as he had described it, it was possible, and probable, as the event proved, that a disease could be communicated by contact. It was, therefore, patent that under these circumstances Lord Colin, in saying that he was suffering from fistula intended to mislead his wife. Now, in April, 1883, Lady Colin’s health was very bad. She was attended by Mr. Thomas Bird, who judged the case so serious that he called in Dr. Braxton Ilieks. One charge made by the respondent—incredible as it might seem—was that Lady Colin, who had a miscarriage, had that miscarriage as the result of adultery, and a further charge was made which caused Mr. Bird to say that unless it was withdrawal he should decline to attend Lady Colin any mote. On this Lord Colin expressed regret, and requested Mr. Bird to continue his attendance. After a time Lord Colin was again operated on by Mr. Alliugham, and in