The Life of the Rt. Hon. Sir Charles W. Dilke, Volume 2Gwynn, Stephen Lucius
History
The Life of the Rt. Hon. Sir Charles W. Dilke, Volume 2
Gwynn, Stephen Lucius
Dilke, Charles Wentworth, Sir, 1843-1911; Great Britain -- Politics and government -- 19th century
'I write you, on this first day of my going regularly to my arduous
work, to express my profound regret that any circumstances of the
moment should deprive me of the opportunity and the hope of
enlisting on behalf of a new Government the great capacity which you
have proved in a variety of spheres and forms for rendering good and
great service to Crown and country.
'You will understand how absolutely recognition on my part of an
external barrier is separate from any want of inward confidence, the
last idea I should wish to convey.
'Nor can I close without fervently expressing to you my desire that
there may be reserved you a long and honourable career of public
distinction.
'Believe me always,
'Yours sincerely,
'W. E. Gladstone.'
Less than a fortnight later the divorce case was heard: the charge
against Sir Charles was dismissed with costs, the Judge saying expressly
that there was no case for him to answer.
The Prime Minister's attitude made it inevitable that while the case was
untried Sir Charles should be excluded from the new Ministry; but not
less inevitably his position before the world was prejudiced by that
exclusion. Had Parliament met, as it usually meets, in February; had the
whole thing so happened that the judgment had been given before the
Ministry came to be formed, exclusion would have been all but
impossible. We may take it that Mr. Chamberlain would have insisted on
Sir Charles's inclusion as a condition of his own adherence; it would
have been to the interest of every Gladstonian and of every follower of
Chamberlain to maintain the judgment. As it was, the effect of Sir
Charles's exclusion had been to prepare the way for a vehement campaign
directed against him by a section of the Press.
By the law a wife's confession of misconduct is evidence against
herself, entitling the husband to a divorce; but if unsupported by other
witnesses it is no evidence against the co-respondent. But a question
arose which afterwards became of capital importance. Should Sir Charles
go into the witness-box, deny on oath the unsworn charges made against
him, and submit himself to cross-examination? His counsel decided that
there was no evidence to answer; they did not put their client into the
box, and the course was held by the Judge to be the correct one.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account