The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1850-11-28

The Hon Judges Oakley aud Pain presiding
CURIOUS QUESTION or TuE LLGALlTI oF TIE MAR
RAGE or DIVORCED HUSBAND.
nov a. Ei-a Inn Rtuoy - .IJItd Dgd.a, Geo Sc
w. KdguGv, ODD Sarah C. Rer Hsi - This vas an action
fer sectment for dover n the :. al state consisting 81
the house aud lot No 22S Tenth ttret, 10 the city OF
New York The plaintiff alleges IA her declaration
that she r. the widow Of James R'dgray dcccascd add
that in that character tEe entitled 20 Oue-third
prrt at said premises for her dpser The caule
ioImttiy tried before Chief Justice oakley aud Jay,
on the 9th Of June, 1873. On he utl II va' esta
blthtd by the plaintiff. and admittrd by the dsrnd
ante that the said James Rdgsay died on he 2lth Of
November l6li Owning In fee the premises mentioned
that ogden Ia possession thereof eno tbs other
dendants claimed title thereto. that ON the 25sh q
August 1871. the marriage ceremony was tciemnized
IN New lork bstveen tbe plain ~ snd Jemes kidsWAy
BY the Rev james tov,l. hethooist Irosestan.
minister, that in 1879 the marriage ceremony vas
sgain solsmpis'd b'tvten The pleint q. under h.r
maiden me 81 Eliza Ann Everett aud the said
Jsmts Ridrvsy. ny the Rev Ward stafford a minister
of The PrtshyteIiau Cnurshi that the parties cohaod
together Husband sus wife tom the time Of their
lrst marriage uutn the death Of James HidEway
Tor tie cetndsuts IL established Al the trial.
that the said James Ridgwsy was duly married % one
Catherine Deb On the "a ~ Jolly. 1919 BY rsEulac
ordained minister ara that they cohahitcd and rssided
together az husband and wife from the sine Of their
dsuahttr bofu a the faid msriiage the i.,h
Of October. 1914, named sarah Dob Ridgray, who
Afterwards became the wife Of Ebcntztr Bennet,
ard who died IN the lifetime q her father The srd
Jsmes Ridgwsy. leaving the defendant. Sarah q Ben-
net her legitimate daughter her survivors that at tho
time 81 James RidrtWtys last mentioned msrriag he
vtsa vidower and had and daughter tince de-
ceafed that the dpisndaut George Ridgway IL his
grandson By bic drst wife. and that be aud Sarah
B,nntt claim title as heH law Of james Rilgway.
Catherine Dob tha second wife Of James Rilgvay. vs.
stll living; that taid Catheriue hled her bill In tho
Court Of Chsbcery, l5th september 1871, for di
vorce from james R0gway the ground Of adultery.
and tfat On the 18Th June 1872, decree Of divorce
duly made by said court The plaintiff Afterwards
established the fsct that Catherine Dob ard James
Ridrway. sntr their marriage ia 1878 separated and
never cohab ed togethsr that from lst January 1880
20 the time Of his death James BidgEay and plaintiff
cOntip ed to live together ss husb md aud wife
verdict vas thken the trial Of 1919 BY consent for
six stIts damages ana fix cents costs, subject 90 the
On risr Il the court I'D the comes up Tor
Argument bin q exceptions For the deend1 nfs
70 Ne row contendtd that the marriage ~ James Wlg
way with Eliza Aun-his former wife Catherine bein
stiil living vas null aud void. The divorce The
ground Of adultery prohibits any marriage with ths
guilty party Fer the plaintiff " ~ here urged that
the decree 81 divorce between James Rdgway and his
former wife In june lS22 made under the provi.
sioBs q the statute which declares THAI ths
riaee bttweeu the paftief shall be dissolved and each
party need tom the obligations thereof but such dis
solution Of marriage shall rot ia any wise affect the
I legitimacy Of the children The subsequent provi-
sion Of the statute prohibiting the marriage Of The
deter dant during the lifetime ofthe complainant does
not constitute part Of the decree the statute By
which the prohibition IL prescribed vas repealed on
let January. 1880 ard that he repeal rendered valid
parti0s a.lex thai lSke. INA