Sunbury American. [volume] (Sunbury, Pa.) 1848-1879, 1848-12-02

them, in consequence of difficulty between
herself and the governess, caused by reports
against the latter in circulation out of doors.
These were charged by her and MIR. B. TO
have been started by Mrs. Butler, but were
denied by her-nevertheless, they aggrava-
ted her sufferings and served to make her
feel wretched. Notwithstanding the prohibi-
ton of her husband, she continued 10 visit
her children at the "Darey farm" until one
day MIR. B. came there and threatened to re-
move the children, as he would not allow
them TO remain if she visited there. She re-
turned to the city, and remained for some
time at his house, not seeing the children
afterward-Mr. Butler having left the city,
in consequence of the house undergoing re-
pairs. She remained in the city until Sept,
1s45, when, feeling that nothing had been
gained by her acceding to her husbands
tcondtions," she sailed for England. The
maintenance which was TO be paid her was
furnished very irregularly-so much so that,
in 1s47, in order TO support herself, she was
forced to s'resort TO the laborious and distaste-
full employment of her youth
To this answer exceptions have been taken
TO the relevancy of the facts set forth and de-
murrer made 10 certain parts. The argument
was commenced by Mr. Cadwalader for the
ibellant. Previously, however, MIR. Gerhard
intimated a willingness 10 withdraw the spe-
cal answer filed, and filed general answer
denying briefly the allegations which were
made, if the respondent would lose nothing
by acceding TO the suggestion OF the Court OH
the subject.
The Court said that the counsel must be
governed by their own judgment as to the
propriety of the course, and after some con-
versalion it was agreed that the case should
60 on upon the pleadings as they stood
Mr.. Cadwalader then commenced the ar
gument upon exceptions and demurrer. His
remarks were discursive, and in consequence
of his laying down no general propositions, it
was impossible to gain succinct idea of the
grounds taken by the libellant. He appeared
TO be endeavoring 10 show that in Pennsylva-
MIA the law in regard to divorce is regulated
by the ecclesiastical law of England, and that
our forms of proceeding are assimilated and
governed by the civil and canon law. The
canon law does not require the Intervention
of jury in divorce cases, the facts being
spread out upon libel and answer. Mr. C..
cited many authorities 10 show that an issue
was not necessary. lie next took up the
question of cohabitation, and cited authori-
ties to show that the legal meaning of the
word was: living in the same house-under
the same rool-in the same habitation. This
branch of the argument was sustained by CO.
pious quotations from the canon and ecclesi-
astical law and other writer's, many of the
authors being in Latin. These were also
brought to illustrate the position that there
can be no forfeiture of the conjugal rights un-
less the acts complained of We're brought
within the meaning of the ecclesiastical law
or the statute of this State. Mr.. Cadwalader
occupied the morning in enforcing the posi-
tions referred TO, and at three o'clock the
Court adjourned until this morning.
Mr.. Butler was in Court, but Mrs. Butler
was not. She arrived in the city yesterday,
and is staying at the Washington House.
The counsel engaged are Nessrs John Cad
walader and Hon. Geo. NJ Dallas for libel
liant, and Messrs. Benz. Gerhard, VIM. NJ.
Meredith and Hon. Rufus Choate, of Massa-
chusetts, for respondent.