Show I CRAWFORD OBTAINS A DIVORCE lIk1I IIrule d IUrH H ed 01111 JjNiMiv July 22Lnwyer Mallhovvs con Uniting lilt address to tlio jury referred u Ilh drtS l re l eds inten o scorn to tbo I roncliifled bloan iiroct orcios nnd said that nn man who 060 not BO brutalized nH lo bo lost to nil shame woiil act nt Sir Charles hnd dono in them Wlipro asked tbo Inwjcr is Fnmij 1 iinn > is licensed sharing in Iho irjgici nliilu Ibis vo inn inarricil vvomaii who Wlli betrayed and degraded into tlicni li being held up lo infamy beforo the whole rnjlsh speaking vv irld for ministering to the horrible lusl of Dilko Innny 1ms van lI IIIrel 1 ppIIIrel VtlGl Win She d ire d not nppear fioforo tho jury Commenting iimn llio apparent present luck of neiiBibilitv rnanifesled bv Mrs rawford Matthews Bald Doubtless llio lust HP irk of Hliamo and rcspe ct in Mrs < rawford eipircel after Iho visits sliei inado lo Dilko H house Continuine ho Slid I Ihe nlleenlum nf a conspiracy has eoin ilelely foiled 1 ask tlio jury to endorse tho Juilgos elecreei nisi I made in Iho finuei mat 1 ask the jury to release Donald raw on from the I lio which I jet binds him lo n life of shame and miserj Aiplause il hir i Walter 1 Iliillonmro I on behalf of Iho I Qinns iroctor f > llowed I Mallhows I Sir IJd RID Walter couti tided thai 1 unless Donald Craw foril proved his wlfo committed adultery lfvnCt lll 1 vnCt rr with Ol i barles ho 1 was not cntille 1 lo n decree of ilhoreo from her in the present cane bceauso the commission of niliillorj with Hie co respondent 1 WOB the pirtlcular hdi anil solo 1 Lrounel on which I llio divorce was nskcd Crawford inlclit obtain n divorcn on the ground of his wlfi s nelulter with CliP tiialosteras nhown ill Ibis trinl Iul 1 ho vonll have to obtain it bv briniiiie l anolhi I r notion II 111 liloh Captain 1 limler was Iho co refipondcnl Isot a single Willie SH had sworn either scclni Mrs Crnwfordo 1 inorleavo Sir Charleshouse nltlioiiLli it vvns alnayK I crowded with olllcials nnd 1 friends Iverv nentltmanlj fooling had restrained Sir Clwrlea from olng upon tlio xtand and les tilvniR durme Iho previous trial 1 hero v an j alh ailark Hlnln upon ms life and ho vnsiin willingt 10 snbjvet himself ti n process of Humiliation which would bo directed to words nmkiup tho i xposnrei eonci mini Mr tofitaou Smith Mrs Crawford rt mother Ihe absence of tanny Sir Walter aiwuel could bo similarly accounted for bho doubl les I had n dark Hlain iiinii her life and it WMenoUKhtokieplier out of tho witness I l rJI5lrI lioj Conocrnine Mrs Crawford Sir Walter i MI hllho 1 idenco show < l she had been Imdl j I renreel and that she wax n mot hold 1 nb in doned woman llio jury was possibly mvirtihlv f mi lessed IvMntlhmvH orushinLoiatim Ihu court 1 najonrnod until to morrow vUienhir Waller Mill conelu lo his nddrciw IiONiwi Iul > 21Tho ease of Crawford URainst rawford mil Dilku VUH uivon It i PhI I Undine nftcrnooii lira Crawford llioj returned ejuiltj l of n ndullery with fair Charles Dilko nnd eranl lug Mr Crawford ndiMjree llio jlry was absent twenty minutes oulj ihedcciiion nrrive < 1 at bj tho I jnrj is that I Mr Crawf > rd is entitled a divorce from tilk wifu on tho ground of adultery with I i Oilko aa decided n7tl by Justice I hir Charles llitt lebrunry 1th last the present laso j tanc i slnipl a rehearing at tho intervention I of tho JuccnH r1 prootor for oh pur so of aaccrtlining whether tho decreo nisi Hhonld nol t bo set nsidu on thu UlOulIlI of collusion I trttteen Sir nnd Mrs Crawford on now fvlIcnoo invalid itine tho wito confession I llojirvlliuliiuln favor of Crawford tho I iroceediiiL inllrins the previous decno nnd makm It flu jluto at tho expiration I fII thou IClII 1 u m nitlin nttiiolilim l to it lliis six months mil i ipiru AiiLnst lth Iho deoreo ls hav JiU II I ctn rl teliii I cbrnilry Uth eJ1 lio JilocuV I 1 iroitor las been condemned pa theidists IJI fllioiroiieiit proouedines |