The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1809-10-10
tFoR THE ENoUIRER.l
In the Superior Court Of chaneery, for ths Rich
nsond District, Fall Term, 1909.
ANN PURCELL q. CuAaLrs PuncELL. ,

The bill in this case WAS fled to obtain ah,ro-
~y: it stated the marriage of the parties many
years ago in New-Jeraey, in the United States
and that. without any impropriety of behavior on
her part, he had separated himself from her with
cut aHorSiing TO her any support; that with all
her endeayors she had often been without the ne
cessaries Of -lifes and his knowledge of the fact;
instead ofexciting even compassion, had caused
only contempt and insult: that she had been fire.
4uenily compelled to depend upon charity for SUBJ
sistence while he enjoyed very considerable
estate real and personal: wherefore, she prayed
yor an adequate support, and for general relief
In support ofthe allegations Of the bill, there
was the following proof:
]. William Richardson swore, that in 1876, he
was living in Philadelphia, q near neighbour to
some OfNfrs. Purcell's connexions, and occasion
ally visited them that two of them, Mrs Dun.
san and Mr. Henry were both persons Of wealth,
and high responsibility thathe often he ard them
express their sorrow, at the marriage Of their
niece and cousin Ann, to Charles Purcell, from
approximations that he would not make good
husband: that in 1887 or 1888, the deponent was
an Richmona, and among others, became boar.
der stths house of Charles Purcell, and that he
did believe the said Ann to be the lawful souse of
the said Charles Purcell.
/. 2. N1nton Collins swore, that he had been ac-
4uainted in the family of Charles Purcell, about
twenty years that during the whole OF his &C.
quaIntance, Mrs Purcell was treated by the said
Charles Purcell very afeCtionately, and that he
did always believe she was his lawful wife, a.
she was introduced as such to the acquaintance
OF many genteel families in this city
5. Col. Robert Gamble swore, that in the year
1870, before he had removed to Richmond, but,
while he and Mrs. Gamble were on visit 20 that
place, Mrs. Purcell was introduced to Mrs Gam.
bic, by Mrs. Sampson Matthe VS., and several O.
Their ladies' that the deponsnt soon afterwards
removed to Richmond, and from the spring of
179l, until the summer of 1898, he and his fami.
ly were neighbours to Charles Purcell, during
which time, their families Ciprocally interchan.
ged the accustomed civilites that the plaintiff
and the defendant lived apparently as man and
wife that he had seen Mrs. Purcell at the city
assemblies or balls, and that reputable families
were in the habit of visiting Mr.. and Mrs Pur-
Cell al their own house: that the deponent was
called upon by the said Charles, to unite with
,sOl. Lambert, to take his wife's privy examinat-
on, which they did: and that the said Charles
always called the plaintiff Mrs Purcell.
4. Col. d. Lambert swore, that at the request
Of Mr.. Charles Purcell, he, with col. Gamble,
waited on the said Ann, at the house of the said
. Charles, on the 11,h February, 1892, and took
her REIMBURSEMENT of dover, in some real estate
conveyed by them; and that he always under.
stood and believed that the said Ann was the wife
OF the said Charles Purcell, until lately, it had
been otherwise limited by the said Charles Pur-
cell
. S. There was the certificate of the clerk of
the Hastings court, of the city of Richmond,
which stated, that the privy examination and re.
lnqushment of dover, by the plaintiff, as stated
by col. Gamble, and col Lambert, had been re-
turned and duly recorded.
8. Besides, there were sesenfeen letters filed
8 dated in s4, '98, and 'O4, from their friends &
connexions in Ireland, one directed to Mr.. Chas.
Purcell, Jesveiler, Richmond, and the ether two
TO Mrs. Ann Purcell, to the care of Mr.. Charles
Purcell, making the most friendly enquiries af.
Ter them and their children 9 others of a most
sfectionate character, dated June and Juy 1870,
addressed by him to her, by the name of Mrs.
Ann Purcell, while she was on a visit to her
friends i'll Philadelphia: 10 others of like cha
rscter, dated in 'o9, 1900, 1901, 1902, and 1903,
addressed by him to her by the same name, while
she was in New-Kent, at Mr.. Andrews in Nor
folk, andin Baltimore 1 other addressed 10 Mr..
Charles Purcell, by Mr.. Pauley, at whose house
she had been accommodated at the instance of
the said Purcell, nclosng his bill, dated July,
1902; and one other from Charles Purcell, da.
ted Richmond, July, 1904, in which he, for the
hrst time, Denounced her-but advised her to go
to her brothers, and rs he might find it convent
snt, he would give her some assistance.
Upon the bill, and the evidence aforesaid, the
plaintiff, by council, at February term, 1908, mo.
we'd for aiianony bendente lite: when the defen-
dant, by counsel, askedieave to take the papers,
IN order to file his answer, which was granted.
The answer was filed the next day--it posi-
lively denied the marriage; and stated, that in
April, 1786, he had joined boating. party with
the plaintiff and seve al others, and had taken
EiP to the Jerseys and that soon afterwards,
she voluntarily embarked with him for Rich
mond, where he acknowledged they had passed
AZ man and wfe--that the REIMBURSEMENT of
d0wer was taken more to satisfy those interest.
ed IN the purchase money, than for any other pur-
pose that he then denied the marriage-that in
August, 1872, young lady from Ireland, was in.
Codueed to him, by the name of Ann Church,
~ Robert Means, the niece of the plaintiff
whose expences the defendant paid but in a
short time, Ann Church proved to be an illegiti-
mate daughter of the plaintiff that, notwitl.
standing this, he educated her, and upon her
marriage, gave her lot and house in the city of
Richmond; but then declared, that it was done
Jor the respect which he had for the said
Plaintif-that in 1898, when his houses were
consumed by fire, he was obliged TO rent houss,
30 which he removed but the psintiff thought
proper TO accept of the invitation of her friends
and not to go with him that shortly aft er, she,
ct her own accord, without his knowledge, ex.
ssnded her visits TO the Borough of Norfolk,
Lynchburg, Williamsburg, Baltimore, and other
places, which he admitted, she had right TO do
shat IN 1sp0and 1904, she was in Richmond and
sSDtnued there for some time without returning
% BIN or asserting any demand against him but
Sill he did afford neT some aid but declared it
was from charity, and not from any obHgafion
Wat he was under that If she had been his wife
which he denied, yet her departure from him,
and her manner of living sitervs ards, would be a
bar to any claim OF doger, If he were to die and
should be OF course 10 aiintogy; and that if they
were married, she could say where the marriage
seremony was performed, the clergyman, and
he persons or some OF them who were present