New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1846-12-03
Law Courts.

cf.crr1 Covar.-Before Judge Barkaioo. - Caroline
Godtn1 vs. Fr.deyick J. NodHS-h!s was suit Tor di-
vorce sent from the Court Of Chancery, on 'eigned
lssGe 70 be tried by Jury The parties are young
They we're married IA lsJ5 and have two children
They came 10 New-York from Eorwslk Conn. (where
they had previously reside0 in Apti! last and M n
commenced business proprietor Of livery stable n
which buainess he is occupied.
charge is tina; he guilty Of improper conduct
WIKI young grl belonging 70 Eor'sslk named Mary
Nash the said improper conduct having occurred al
Sorwslk from ls4i up 70 the time OF ms LEAVING thar
place and also after ne this city the said hary
having come 20 Sew-YoTk soon after MT. y and his
family and that he provided board for her under
fictitious names, &c.
The charge in The bill is the said Frederick Jack
Eodne guilty OF inadeity IN ,hs state PRIOR TO
2ith June 1916, and that was me question Tor the
iury 10 try. The charge denied. Objection was
taken testimony being allowed as % improper conduct
in Connecticut being out of this State, bat II was per
ir,ed IN the pronse OF the Counsel for complainant TO
connect il with the conduct OF Nodnc and Mary Nash
af,er the latter arrived in NewYork iary n was in
Court. She is Of handsome appearance apparently
abOutl6 OF IL years Of age.
L shown by testimony that the girl resided with
her mother at Eorwalkst directly opposite the dwelling
o; Mr and Mrs and That she occasionally lived IN their
family. Improper conduct was shown al Connecticut.
|; was also shown that Msry ~ Immediately on arriv-
ing the city went directly to defendants stable that
nc took her 10 boarding house in the Bow9ry where re
stated that her MARY Marvin and tna she mad
come the city 70 look for her parents she there
manned Is days that she frequently out in the
evening TIL 10 O'Clock aud occasion LETT eaiy
seen occasion, about clock in the evening, TO
e;uto the carriage with defendant which he drove up
sidewalk receve her and that ne then drove up
the Bowcry evening the landlord took her 70 IA sk
staying out late she said she had with young
man from Chatham ST. but tell Jack defendant OF
u as there would be difficulty. &c. she APP
proved OF there and defendant took her the house
Mrs Finch los Sixth az this on Saturday night
Sunday afternoon he called aud che word for him
up TO her bedroom he remained there, with
Inc door locked for half hour Mrs. F. formed bad
opinion Of her after week defendant took her to the
house OF Mre. Cogswel No IS Jones and stated that
she his sister had lest her mother and greved 80 in
the country he brought her town Mrs {. could not
take her 20 board but recommended him to her sister
Mrs Roorne 20 Mineita-st to whom he told the same
story Mrs Nodinc found out where Mary was and told
Mfs. G. in relation to her Mary then went to board
with the persons in the basement.
The defence principally was that Mrs. N. had forgiven
what done Connecticut and that nothing had been
shown support the charge OF intdey in this city II
also attempted 10 show by declarations OF witness
who carried 10 Mrs n from defendant S3 per month
ordered by the Court oil Chancery for the maintenance
OF herself aud children that her object in filing the bill
was 10 get portion OF his property &c. but the test
nony appeared to fail There also charge by de-
PENDANTS counsel of improperly the part OF Mrs. ~
and that che would be married again in month II this
divorce granted but the counsel for complainant
declared there the slightest ground for such a
charge Verdict this orenoon.For complainant Mcssrs.
McCuhll nnd Crist for defendant, Mr.. Williams.