The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1850-06-21

By an act of the General ASS nhiy of the Com
1850, entitled San Act rtguIatiag Divorces"
amongst other things, it is rnacird that where
either party TO ay' contract OF mrri,ge heretofore
entered into, shall have been guilty at such lube
coming and disrespectf conduct, exposing, ua-
necessarily, the other 10 public notoriey and re-
proach for alleged abandonment, ia aay Of The
public newspapers or Journals at this State, ny
publication, or by other unnecessary and cruel con-
duct endeavored to disgrace the SANE, it shall be
lawful for the Judges of the several circuit courts
of this Commonwealth, upon hill filed nv the party
aggrieved or complaining, alleging such facts, or
either Of them as above enumerated, 10 entertain
jurisdiction of the same, and TO cause jury to be
empanelled and sworn 10 try the issue in SAID
cause; and if, thereupon it shall appear, by cor'p PEE
tent proof, that the allegation aeg atoms so
charged are true, and the jury empanelied sha'i
so ind the same in their verdict, the court before
whom such suit is pending, shall therenpon enter
up decree OF divorce upon such vrrdict, Tor the
party SO complaining, restoring hun or her 10 all
the rights and privileges of AN unmarried pr rson;
and in all cases the court shall have power TO
change and restore the maiden name ot the party
80 divorced: Provided, however. III ali such cases,
the court shall be satisfied, before granting the di
vorce, that the defendant has h al notice OF the
pendency OF the suit, when a nonresident of this
State; and in all other cases the same proceedings
shall be had thereon as in other in chancery;
and nothing in this act shall be construed to
affect the rights of either party TO property or ALI
mony, now established by law, and in all
cases, the court shall have power decree the
same; Provided further, That in all suits for d
eions of this aci, the defendant my plead
20 the same, as in other cases At law or equity"
On the 10Th day of March, 1850, the complainant
6ed her bill in the Jefferson Circuit Court, alleg
ing in substance these facts, viz That she
married 10 the defendant at the house of her father
n the city Of Louisville, on the - day of Decem-
Der, 1913, where she and her hush nd resided un-
Al about the 18th March, 1919 that about this
lime they left Louisville, proceeded to Washing
ON City, and thence to Boston, in the State Of
Massachusetts, where the father of ner husband
tesided that no arrangements had been made
housekeeping, but that they went to hotel of
IT city, where rooms had been eng ,ged for them
It her health became seriously impaired during
he journey to Boston, from hemorrh ,ge of the
ungs, and her constitution so greatly shattered by
Ter subsequent residence in Boston, as to cause
erself and friends 10 dread termination fatal to
er ne; Under these circumstances, she wrote to
er father. who visited Boston in the month of
ugust, 1919. and with the consent of her husband
etnrned to Kentucky under the protection of her
Hther, and has ever since resided in his house.
he further alleges, that the defendant was fully
pprlsed, both before and subsequent to her mar
age, by her physician, that she wo nd be unable
reside in Boston, the place of his nativity, sui.
ring under the pulmonary disease that threatened
er, and survive the effects Of that rigorous cli-
ate but in compliance with his wishes she de-
rmined to go TO Boston and make the expert
lent She also substantially alleges tht when
pc came to Kentucky, under the protection of her
Their, ii was with the hope that her health would
restored, and that she would thus he eaabled to
turn with her husband to Boston during the sue
eding autumn that her husband was advised.
ON time to time, of the precariousness of her
alth-a temporary or permanent residence was
opposed to him until the restoration Of her health,
hich he declined-he did not subsequently como
kentucky to visit her, or TO go with her to Bos-
but declined doing so; and her health being
ebe, she did not return 10 Massachusetts, Such
ing the relations OF the parties, she further al
ges that the defendant has been guilty of the I'M
coming and disrespectful conduct of unnecessa-
exposing her to public notoriety and repro ich
alleged abandonment, and of the unnecessary
l conduct IN her
publications in the newspapers and journals of
State, and to effect said purpose, did cause the
loving unnecessary advertisement TO be pub
he'd in the Morning Courier and the Journal Of
lrnniyce, two daily, newspapers published in this
", to-wit:
Whereas, my wife, saliie Ward Lawrence has de-
ted me wifully and without cause, this is to eau
all persons against harboring or trusting her on
ea Sr hold %y M ST 20 debts
1osror, Mass, 1850.
Ehe charges that this publication was unfound-
and malevosnt, and intended TO expose her TO
Plic notoriety end reproach, to exclude her from
tiety, and to blight her prospects OF happiness
L said advertise Was deliberately published
said Lawrence with the intent and design Of
derng il impossible for her again to live with
as his wife, and in order to law by these false
calumuious statements, a foundation for OBJ
ming divorce; and she charges that said Law
ce made said publication as preliminary step
The said Lawrence Is made defendant, and the
ropriate decree Of divorce, &c, Is asked for,
\ copy OF the bill was duly served upon the de-
dsnt, in the city OF Boston, and the same fully
blamed 10 him, by an officer legally constituted
that purpose, on the 4th day OF April. 1850.
pom the day Of the present term Of the Jefier-
Circuit Court, the cause having been regularly
led and the said defendant failing to appear,
pn the motion Of the complainant, jury was
pannelled and sworn, as required by the statute,
ry the ISSUE end after hearing the testimony,
nrned into court the following verdict, viz: 1--WE,
The jury, find that the allegations in complain
rs bill are true, and that Timothy b. Lawrence
been guilty of the uubecoming and disrespec-
conduct Of unnecessarily exposing the COM
inant 10 public notoriety and rcproach for an al
ed abandonment, by falsely publishing in two
wspapers, published in the city OF Louisville,
4 complainant had deserted him wilfully and
hout cause, and warning all persons against
Fborng or trusting complainant on his account
ouch being the fact, presented BY tina record, l
asked 10 enter a decree, in conformity TO the
ber ofthe bill, and in pursuance OF the provi-
hs Of the statute Of 1850.
The decree is resisted by the attorney for the
smonweath (who is required by law 20 oppose
qualifications for divorce) on two grounds, viz.
The act Of 1850, under which thi proceeding
had, il prospective and not retrospective, and
the act complained of (the offensive publict-
in the newspapers Of this city,. was COM
ted prior 10 its passage, and IA, therefore, not
hin its operation And that if the act ~ retro
cive merely, il operates to divest vested right,
Is. therefore, null and void. 81 IL does rot
cicnty appear that the parties. either Of them.
he time of iiling the bill, were dcmiciled in Ken
by, and therefore this court has no jurisdiction
he case.
The fret objection must he decided in view
be facts sppsrest upon the record IL does not
ar from ths allegations Of the bi or the YER
Of the ~. whether the pubcat COM
ned 81 vf-Enaie prior or subsequent to the
aue Of the act. II is dated :" Bnstoa. February,
D." but IL does Tot therefore follow that IL was
ally polished in the journals Of this State at
time. or that u was not so published after the
of March, $50, when the act took effect. The
plsinant is entitled TO the benefit OF the legal
ndrent upon the finding Of the jury-that the
c ation was made both before and after the
acc Of the act. IL is unimportani, therefore,
his view, whether the act be prospective or
pspcctive. II prospective, the complain ant
Inc brought herself within its provisions, this
nical objection is removed. Besides, IL will
zen that the act under which this proceeding
ad makes IL the duty Of the Court to pronounce