The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1848-11-29

pssrsnes marveuousiy resembled Year Of Consola.
uon,"s passage which criticised Byron for writing
compositions way worthy of him, and evidencing
worldly, sordnd feeling with the pen which wrote
" the brilliant and generous of his produce
tone, and characterized them As sham realities To
the enquiry TO what book" 1t was, Mr.. Cad wAla.
der answered evasively that 1t Was the production
an TO saw that copies were kept Of letters passing
between the parties long before any difficulty arose
20 prepare to meet case like this, they were indeed
ed to stand in the place Of legal allegations. The an
does not pretend willingness to return TO Mr.
her lsst leaving 0i him traos her. she goes
where she will she does What she will and nothing
seems to trouble her except the deuon that the sen
tepce here win brand her bad woman, bad wife,
and q bad mother but which think only shows that
abe rs mistaken In the excitement OF feeling Tor the
marriage is already solved practically as TO her, by
her own act abe has withdraw from the habitation of
her husbano and the sw can give him the only remedy
The circumstances of the show that Mrs Butler
had the of desertion from her hus-
banda house though her intention had been conceal
ed Thi. is proved rom hef letters, IN wncn Is
in Possession Of answer by the LIST OF Sept lSi5
The letter Englan must have been written early
as the bt of August. In the meantime, she writes
him letters in which she does not threaten this
turn but simply informs her husband that she con-
siders their agreements completely cancelled. In
another letter she informs him that she will not be
excluded from the Of her children though the
truth was, that she had never been ted from
to them, though the husband had given their
control and superin;e ndence to governess, which,
under the circumstances, he thought it unwise the
here being useless and prejudical to my children
shall comply with my fathers desire to return TO eng
posed to restore to my children nothing will pre-
vent my resuming my situation The next day she
goes to public hotel without his knowing it, and
writes him note from thence, enquring If she shall
rely upon her father for main enance and then goes
to her father at all events and without reference to
her husbands wishes and justifes her departure,
upon his omission to give her the of her children.
She did not then, pretend that she cruelty used
did not preten that che had perfect security Of
m
Thing which in legal standard deserves the Dame of
cruelty or harshness Mr. Butler had upon every &C.
cason, ssd be would never be party to a final Sc
parstion and she could not expect it. The learned
counsel then took up the circumstances alleged in
the answer and Investigated their claim to be consi.
dered "cruey, or harshness Passing on to the oc-
preceding the withdrawal he deprecated the
insnuaons of the answer in regard to the governess
and moved that they should be expunged from the re.
cord He insisted that matter of that natur. will be
stricken of where party party the
record All the little circumstances spread upon the
record were commented upon and 1t argued that
they were trivial unimportant, and so slight in them
selves to constitute ground for the allegation of
cruelty made by Mrs. Butler II results in this that
the only reason Of Mrs Buffers defence is ncompat-
bility compatibility only of temper and taste The
circumstances of themselves really not sufficient
to justify her withdrawing from Aer husbands house
but, having done there other the
deserted husband than to resort to the law.
About two O'Clock Mr.. Cadwalsder closed his re-
marks and he was followed by VIM. NJ Meredith. Esq.
Mr. MEREDITH said, that the general nciples laid
down by the counsel on the other ride they not
prepared 10 oeny put' IN the aPpncation OF those
principles we shall differ with them and also in the
modes and avenues by which We shall approach the
case The other side has laid it down the law, that
the forms ana proceedings OF our law OF divorce have
been derived from the ecclesiastical law. The early
cases do show that long before the reformation there
vasin England a difference between the law of di-
vorce as administered there, and in other Catholic
countries That difference arose from cutting of the
appear 10 the rope Inc divergence was caused by
the want OF common court Of appeal. In regard to
substance we differ. We have not the English pro.
ceedpgs In cur courts. The ecclesiastical law does
NOT OBTAIN mere or the ecclesiastical system but
that oeebrated law which exists In the Protestant
countrl@s OF continental Europe Therefore, mas
much ne wiHui ana malicious desertion never was a
greund OF uvorce IN England-either mensd
81 moro or from the bonds OF matrimony, we
Sanhot DC reIerred TO the English ecclesiastical
aw, Ior IL contains nothing upon the subject -
EVen In regard 10 aouitery our law or divorce does
Dot agree with the Engsh ecclesiastical law Where,
tnen mutt we go for definition! The answer lie, to
ches This is the ,ourcs from whanca omr ta ~ q; an
rived be to in order to dstermine
the proper foundation Of system Of divorce Mr.
Meredith then took up the question of the proper
definition Of " malicious desertion ~ He said it was
not sponte sue of her sccord-as cont ended by
Mr.. Cadwalader but it means more it means