ave the name of Cora
Walcott, was charged with being drunk and disorderly on the previous
day, and annoying Mr. Peter Humphreys, of Maple Cottage, Brook Green.
Sergeant T 14 stated that he had observed the prisoner behaving in an
extraordinary manner outside Mr. Humphreys' house, and knocking at the
door in a most violent manner. As she would not go away, and her conduct
was a serious annoyance to the neighbors, he was compelled to take her
into custody. In reply to the prisoner, the witness said that she was
undoubtedly drunk. She had asked for Miss Campion, and he had
ascertained that that lady did previously live at Maple Cottage. She had
told him that she was the wife of Mr. Alan Walcott, who had deserted
her, after making an attempt on her life. The magistrate here
interposed, and said that the prisoner's questions were totally
irrelevant. What she had stated, even if true, was no excuse whatever
for the conduct of which she had been guilty. Prisoner (excitedly):
'This woman had taken my husband from me.' Magistrate: 'Be silent.'
Prisoner: 'Am I to starve in the streets, whilst they are living in
luxury?' Magistrate: 'You are fined five shillings and costs. If you
have grievances you must find another way of remedying them. If you say
any more now, I shall have to send you to prison without the option of a
fine.' The money was paid by a gentleman in court."

As soon as Alan had read this he went to the solicitor who knew all his
affairs, and got him to go to the Hammersmith Police Court. The
magistrate permitted him to make a statement contradicting the lies told
by Cora, and the newspapers printed what he said. But how many persons
read the first report who never saw the second? And how many of those
who read both preferred to believe the scandal, taking the contradiction
as a matter of course?

The "gentleman in court" who paid Cora's fine was an enterprising
reporter, who thought it might be worth his while to hear what this
deserted wife had to say. He knew two or three papers which would
welcome a bit of copy dealing with the marital troubles of a well-known
literary man. The story of this French wife might be a tissue of
lies--in which case it would be a real advantage to Mr. Walcott and Miss
Campion to have it printed and refuted. Or it might be partly or wholly
true--in which case it was decidedly in the interest of the public to
make it known. The argument is familiar to everyone connected with a
popular