The other day I was in a local bookstore that specializes in romance novels. Amidst the bodice-rippers (geeks go for a ripped bodice now and then; or even an intact bodice – we have a lot of imagination) were a history and a biography that had been repackaged to look like romance novels. Intrigued, I bought both.

The cover of Victorian Scandal, by Roy Jenkins, shows a gentleman in a top hat, faintly reminiscent of Rex Harrison. To his right is a blonde young lady with a totally non-Victorian hairstyle and demonstrating that silicone was actually invented in the 19th century, presumably by one of those coal-tar chemists. Big Ben appears in the background, so we know we are in London and not Ulan Batar. The subtitle is: THE BIZARRE STORY BEHIND A NOTORIOUS AFFAIR THAT CHANGED HISTORY.

This is a biography of Sir Charles Dilke, a British politician whose heyday was the 1880s. He reached some fairly responsible positions under the Gladstone governments, and his name was bruited about as a possible successor to the Grand Old Man.

And, quite frankly, unless you are interested in the fine details of the Irish Question and other now obscure elements of Victorian era politics, his life was pretty damn dull. The “notorious affair” has some interest – a young lady accusing a prominent of powerful politician of seducing her never happens any more, after all. The lady, Mrs. Donald (Virginia) Crawford, was much younger than (18) than Dilke (40) when the event occurred; she confessed it to her husband and Dilke was named correspondent in a divorce case.

Alas for those expecting Love’s Rampaging Passion, even the description of the divorce trial is pretty boring. Although Mrs. Crawford proclaimed that Dilke had subjected her to “every French vice”, there are no titillating details other than rumors of a threesome with Dilke’s maid; for all we know the extent of Mrs. Crawford’s French subjection was being forced to consume odiferous cheese. Further, alas for Mr. Dilke, although his accuser’s case was very weak, he turned out to be an atrociously bad witness in his own defense and was represented by equally bad counsel. The verdict confused everybody; the case against Dilke was dismissed but his Mr. Crawford was granted a divorce. There was another trial, but that was even more confusing; it was not a retrial but a special inquest to determine if the evidence presented at the first trial was adequate to support the verdict. Even the presiding judge appeared to be puzzled.

The net effect was Dilke’s career was ruined, even though he was almost certainly not guilty. He resigned his seat in Parliament – he eventually returned but was never considered for any higher government positions. The author speculates inconclusively as to why he was accused in the first place; at the time there were no allowable grounds for divorce for a women except desertion – your husband could live in a harem and you couldn’t get a divorce as long as he continued to support you. A man, on the other hand, could obtain a divorce for adultery. Author Roy Jenkins diffidently suggests that Mrs. Crawford was unhappy in her marriage and had no way to get out of it except to accuse herself of adultery; claiming she was seduced by a prominent politician rather than the milkman may have been her way of making herself less culpable in the public eye; and she did have some minor connection with Dilke – she was his brother’s widow’s sister and he had met her a few times on social occasions, so at least ostensibly there was opportunity.

Not badly written, but not of real interest either.

(The other book was The Great Indian Mutiny and is reviewed separately). ( )

1296. Victorian Scandal: A Biography of the Right Honourable Gentleman Sir Charles Dilke, by Roy Jenkins 19 Oct 1974) This book was read because of my memory of how greatly I enjoyed Jenkins' idyllic biography of Herbert Asquith. This book is not as well done, and its Briticisms I found a little heavy. But it was enjoyed. Dilke was born Sept 4, 1843, was first elected to the House of Commons in 1868, had a brief fling with republicanism in the early 1870s, became prominent as a radical Liberal in the 1870s and early 1880s, and then was shattered by a divorce trial in the mid 1880s. He returned to the House in 1892 but never was in the Government, and died Jan 26, 1911. ( )