Biography of William Ward 1st Earl of Dudley 1817-1885

Adeline Horsey Recollections. The intimate history of Society is full of unsuspected tragedy, but when the veil is torn aside, the unhappiness of many a husband and wife becomes tragedy in real earnest, and the light-hearted butterflies who sip the sweets of the good things of this life are horrified at the idea of such things happening in their midst. The grim story I am about to relate concerned particular friends of mine, and it made a great impression upon me. [his wife] Constance de Burgh (age 21) was one of my great friends, she was a very pretty, charming girl who married Lord Ward (age 34), who had always been considered a great parti by mothers with marriageable daughters.

Constance was not in love with her husband; he had proposed and she was told she must accept him. A dutiful daughter of rather colourless character, Constance never dreamt of opposition, and so she became Lady Ward.

Marriage frequently means disillusion, and the Ward marriage was not a success.

William Ward was a pleasant man, but he had extraordinary ideas of how to treat a wife, ideas which could only be tolerated by a tactful woman who could laugh at them, and forget all the unpleasantness they entailed. Poor Constance was not tactful, and not accommodating. Her husband worshipped the beautiful; he had selected his wife partly on account of her beauty, and he treated her like some lovely slave he had bought. He had a strange, almost barbaric passion for precious stones, and he bought quantities of them and lavished them on his wife, who appeared at great entertainments literally ablaze with diamonds.

What pleased Lord Ward more than anything was to make Constance put on all her jewels for his special benefit when they were alone. He would admire her thus for hours, delighting in her lovely unclothed figure, and contrasting the sheen of her ropes of pearls with her delicate skin, as she sat on a black satin-covered couch.

These strange proceedings at first terrified and then disgusted Constance. She appealed to her father, but her parents decided that her husband's peculiarities came within the meaning of the marriage vows, and she was told she must submit to her husband's humours.

Adeline Horsey Recollections. 13th July 1851Fate then threw [his wife] Constance (age 21) across Lord Dupplin's (age 23) path, with the result that the tragedy began.

I knew Blanche Dupplin (age 23) very well, and often when I was lunching with her she would tell me sorrowfully about her husband's infatuation. "It is useless to expostulate", said Blanche; "Dupplin will not abandon the affair, and I don't know how it will end if William Ward (age 34) finds out his wife's infidelity".

Matters came to a crisis at a fancy dress ball given by Lady Londonderry (age 22) at Holderness House, the chief feature being a quadrille danced by ladies representing famous European queens. I met the Wards there; Constance looked delicate, and early in the evening she said she felt ill and must go home. She came over to where her husband and I were standing, and asked him whether he intended to accompany her.

"No, I shall stay", said Lord Ward, "I mean to have several dances with Miss de Horsey. Go home by all means if you are tired".

Constance was enceinte [pregnant], so her absence excited no comment as she was far from strong. Her husband remained until nearly 3 a.m., when he departed for his house in Park Lane - it was daylight, and, as he approached the house, he suddenly noticed a man leaving it. Their eyes met; it was Lord Dupplin, who turned and ran for his life down the street.

Lord Ward entered, and startled the sleepy footman by telling him to rouse the servants and bid them assemble in the hall. He then went upstairs to his wife's bedroom.

What passed between them was told by Constance to a friend; her husband came to her bedside and accused her of committing adultery with Lord Dupplin. "Get up, madame", he continued, "my house is yours no longer; arrangements shall be made for your future, but henceforth you are no wife of mine".

Tears and entreaties were useless, and Constance was obliged to dress; William Ward then led her past the scandalised servants who were waiting downstairs, and - turned her out of doors.

The poor frightened girl managed to reach her parents' house in Grosvenor Crescent, and implored them to give her shelter, but they were as heartless as her husband, and told her they could not take her in. More dead than alive, she turned her steps to Conduit Street, where her singing-master lived, and this gentleman, full of compassion for his unfortunate pupil, allowed her to remain there until the next day, when she went to Ostend.

On 12th December 1874 the jewels of [his wife] Georgina Moncrieffe Countess Dudley (age 28) were stolen at Paddington Station. The earl offered a £1,000 reward and anonymity to the thief if the jewels should be returned but they were never seen again. The Times reported:

The robbery of Lady Dudley's jewel-case outside the Great Western Railway Station, at Paddington, on Saturday evening, just previous to the starting of the Worcester express leaving London at 6.30pm, was effected under circumstances which leave little doubt that the thief was a practised hand, and had laid his plans with an ingenuity worthy of a better purpose. Lord (age 57) and Lady Dudley arrived at the railway station in his lordship's brougham at 6.20pm, and were immediately followed by a four-wheeled cab conveying two of the Countess' waiting women, each in charge of a ponderous jewel box and other articles of a lady's toilette. Scott, one of the women, was the first who alighted, and having deposited upon the pavement the box under her care, while turning round to assist her companion, for better security and with commendable caution placed one foot upon the jewel-case. In an unlucky instant her attention was diverted by the other maid, and she removed her foot from the box. Her companion having alighted, Scott stooped to recover the box, when, to her great consternation, she found it had been removed. An instant search was made by the Earl's servants and by the railway officials in attendance, but no tidings could be gained of it. His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales (age 33) arrived at this moment to travel by the same train in a 'slip carriage' as far as Slough on his way to Windsor, and a desire on the part of the railway authorities to despatch the train punctually led to some little confusion, amid which the express left the station without any intelligence of the missing box having been obtained. The Worcester express made its first stoppage at Reading. On arriving there Lord Dudley alighted, and explaining to the station agent the circumstances, requited that every compartment in the train should be searched, in the hope that the missing box might have been separated from his other luggage. The search proving fruitless, his Lordship decided upon returning to London at once, which he did, accompanied by the lady's maid, in a special train as soon as the express had left Reading. On reaching Paddington, he drove direct to his jewellers, Messrs Hunt and Roskell, of New Bond Street, whither the police from Scotland Yard were immediately summoned. Under their advice a detailed list of the lost jewels was prepared and circulated among the leading metropolitan and local pawnbrokers. Among the principal articles lost may be mentioned a pearl and diamond bracelet, presented by the inhabitants of Dudley on the occasion of the marriage of the Earl and Countess; a diamond collette necklace, a diamond cross, a sapphire and diamond bracelet, a diamond necklace with pearl and diamond drops, a pair of very fine pearl earrings, two pairs of diamond earrings, five diamond stars, three diamond butterflies, a cat's-eye pendant and earrings, a diamond padlock, a ruby and diamond pendant, an emerald and diamond watch with enamelled chain, a turquoise and ruby watch, an enamelled and diamond watch, and a crystal watch. We are informed on undoubted authority that the amount of loss of Lady Dudley's jewellery is not half what it was first stated to be.