The New York herald., 1844-10-25
In Chancery.
bafore Vice Chanc ellor Nc cCoun.

hdrmonlOusly n.
ruger retp ed from his profession and built house in
Hei kmer county intending occupy himself with sgri-
cultural pursuits OF sudden on Misrepresentation Of
some accounts Mrs Cruger ths order
the income in his favor This she af erwards said was
done IN order to change the agent But why interfere
with the order to do ths' The change could have been
made without just enectuay That the real intention
was however, to revoke that order and deprive Mr..
Cruger OF the income, the positive testimony OF Mr.
Monroe then trustee clearly shows and the accompany
ing circumsancss place beyond question. It was on
this occssion, and in consequence of this STEP the
certain enect OF which was to place him in abject
dependence, that Mr. Cruger removed to a boarding
house and wrote to his wife come him here that s
the consequence hut provided another residence where
they might live together in their just natural rea
ought 10 have remained in the house he left as he had
right at law to do and BY main force compelled his wife
TO vsw him ofthis right there be doubt but
had no exercised IT, what would not be the outcry
against him instead Of this he availed himself that
morali fuence the intre of friends naturally has
rupture oil this Kind ID oDined the immediate
par les, but has baneiul influence the condition Of
the entire family connection spreading far and wide
and involving each all in the painful Controversy
Accordingly mutual friends were called in and among
these MIR William Bard took q part to restore peace -
The character for high worth and benevo disposition
o ths gentleman, nssds no propping by have
he opposite side ventured to further than to de-
scribe him as the unconscious Instrument CT r Cru.
proved that Mr. Bard interered by Mrs Crugers special
request against his nephews wishes aud acted through.
Of Capt. Whether acting for her. ivded the income
OF the ssae, giv one halt MIR. Cruger absolutely
ana reservpg 20 ms WIFE 10 crafty her dosy ncrasy
lar as Reasonable, control over the other half II
porant that should pause on this transaction as il is
the landmark for all that basis on VIII ch Mr.
G, uger has consistently acted-the standard by which
their friends have regulated their advice the
platform for the last arrangement made This award Of
the deliberately rendered in writing and il
perfectly fair and mpeachable and Mrs Crnger in
her letter TO her sister Of the 3Oh November 6 goes
even 1t, and binds herself solemnly gain
to revoke the order III her husbands fave for the
income, and gives him, though he had twice rejected
them, the securities for his relatives debts Under this
nrrnn uantf fhna mad orI
pleasantly until the year 1885, when Mrs Cruger agan
revokes the order for the income orbddng agent
OF the estate to accept her husbands customary drafts
He was then in the country, and to defray
penses drew through the banks what was
and his draft was dshonored and back protested
nonacceptsnce HIS wife was in the city and gave the
directions through two Of her trustees iorbddng the
agent to accept s true the draft afterwards paid
monsraed against this fresh violation Of the income or
der and the former had been made to feel the unplea
santness OF the occurrence, and the precarisus po
sition he occupied This led to q renewed aeita.
ton Of the old and pervading question and under
carte 6lanche from Mrs Cruger deed was prepared
through Mr. Monroe Tor about two thirds of the income
executed by her. and sent to Mr. Crpger who Immediate
ly returned another deed, making her share half in
Bard. Mr. Monroe has been found fault with for his
in this matter and accused dctaton and ntim
Cruger thanked him the bottom Of her heart AT the
time fer what he had done, and did her husband al
though he did not conform to- but altered his arrange
ment Mr. Monroes conduct throughout seems to have
been candid upright and ds teresed and the only par
tcle Of evidence brought show that he ever treated
Mrs Cruger even unkndly is what took place at his in
terview with her the 2lh November 1899 twenty two
days after the deed he had negotiated executed by
her This interview occurred at the house Of her brother
Mr. William Douglas, who appears from the evidence not
to be person Of much force Of character ana who in
stead Of passing the after of in silence or inter
to stop the Misunderstanding between his sister
ther inaw widened the breach by ordering Mr. Monroe
out OF his house. This produced from the latter gentle
man the following letter
New YoRx, Nov. 25, 1880.
Ma. WILLIAM DouoLAs-
sR-For your conduct last night when you allowed
yourself 10 misunds rsand me wke talking 10 your sis
ter, who assumed dictatorial manner which is at ali
times offensive, and which rebnked by rdicule GER
tany not anger-you know enough Of to be sstisf
that had you not been the brothsr Of my WIFE &C. |
should not have allowed my self to find for YOU an spo
logy but rebuked your very uncaed for and upgsnte.
red
find much consolation in the command wns so for
that our dissolution hss not been Of serious cha
racer and take leave OF and your sister, Mrs Cruger
with the best wishes for your ha ppiness.
am, yours, &c, -
From this letter then, il appears 1t was Mrs Cruger
and not Mr. Monroe that ,aoraln and Il is idle
to talk OF dctson coercion towards one who sepa
he sell from her husband Just whenever abe pea
At this juncture although she had written Crger
ten days after the arrangement made between him
and Mr. Monroe dividing the income, that she had not
the slightest idea Of separating from him she did
him when he afterwards came to and then assigned
this very arrangement as the for her doing
The complainant in this case nay it please the Court
living apart from his wife, this charge is predicated
on his letter to Mrs. Monroe, lated
WARRINGTON, 22i Feb, 1870.
Mr. DEAR Mas MoNRoE-
Although quite ready with to your letter o!
the l4th INST refrain from making it, finally a step
taken that closes all further discussion
On the Oath oil september last, in 1885, announced
through your husband, that would longer contin ue
in state 81 dependence AMI insecurity and the 27,h
October that your sister chose separate herself
ue should touch dollar Of her income With full
knowledge OF this she executed the deed Of appointment
Oft I'd November aAd yet afterwards separated herself
from me because accepted ofh
RENAME nearly two tbs alone in the country, re-
turn. to town the 25h December, stad month and
half az jamaica AMI have paused here for ten days
doing all in my istrntly with the above de
caration oath September effect reunion The tone
Of your last letter. snd Of hers to Mr. Monroe Of the 18Th
at this late day conclusive that there remains
least chance Of Il.
The separation has hitherto been her act exclusively
from this date II 10 mine. The motive for il with me- m
TO my livelihood the of pay ing debts ior
which am liable to her estate and 10 escape inc.tud
ave retained possess OF her deed Of appointment. II
il cancelled. has always been my intention in
conformity with my declaration of 9th October-and
surrender It, and with it, all hope Of being reunited
~ your si,ter. Your sincere friend
HENRY D. CRUGER
Now happens that this letter when sent was accom-
panied by declarations then made known to Mr. Cruger
as Mr.. Monroe who iranked proves to the effect that
although he would not live In her house. any part
Of her property in state Of yet he was ready
spon what he might be able TO provide by his
ngs And this 10 called desertion by the husband and
hsgrant abandonment Of duty His wife had actually
eloped from him. tells him she will not live th him. and
when he returns to New York the following June, she
leaves the city avoid him. she admits in her answer
What then ought he to have done TO avoid this mputa
ton Of violating his marital duties The Coun.
sci for Mrs CIuger tells he ought to have taken
possession by force he had the legal right 10 do
Of the house in the country in town, and om.
PEELED his wife to live with him, and because he
has not done charges him with gross violation Of his
duties a husband Had Mr. Cruger done this, what o
phippic would we not then have had against physical
control, violent measures and brutal conduct SO
that, let him, in his trying stance, 20 which
way he may whether to the right to the left, he
Is sure to go wrong, and II he goes straight for.
ward Is his wont, he is still more In error under
the unoandid and malignant misconstructions Of sus
picion, false accusation, and sinister designs But
to proceed with the topic of family dispute II has
been said that this all preence got up by Mr. Cru.
ger in spirit OF avarice and with determine ion to ac
compsh his object regardless Of the means used SO
own but Of his wife family and lends have taken sides
and cooperated with him in this strange plot to exto
tharo mt homa ...f