New-York daily tribune., 1851-07-14
Superior Court. -SArvspAY, July u.
SPECIAL rERw
Before Judge Oak

Patrick CoyIe against Margaret Coyle.-
Motion on behalf OF Mrs. C. TO set aside decree OF
divorce obtained against her on the ground OF ma
deity, the decree giving TO Mr. C. the care and Gus
toiy Of their two children, permitting HIM 10 marry
again-as usual with such decrees-5nt tcroiddlng
her 10 marry again during his lifetime,
Mrs :, IN support Of the motion to set aside the
decree denies on oath. the charge OF inhdehty-al-
legcS that she has always acted properly, but that
Mr. e. III treated and abandoned het about two years
ago and refused 10 provide for her She sued TO oo-
tam from him a limited divorce on the ground OF
abandonment and cruelty. shortly alter she com
menced said suit she was are atcdby conivance OF
her husband ihIs was denied ant conveyed To prl-
son. and sent 10 Blackwels Island for SIX months,
on false and untounded charge " being vagrant
-ha, while there the attorney oi Nj &. came to The
prison and handed her printed paper, when she
could not read and he did not explain II IN any way
10 hcr-SubseQuontly another attorney sent up Tor
her permission 10 let HIM defend her IN SUIT entered
by her husband. When her term ol imprisonment
was expired, she Snt TO the house OF her husband,
and was told that he had got decree OF divorce
while she was thus IN prison. On inquiry, she iounu
that person calling himself Peter Groghan. and
claim ng as belonging to Wilhamshnrgh. had sworn
before The referee that she had been guilty oi nndei
llyand decree of divorce was accordingly orutreu
against her She denies ever having seen tht sdlu
Peter Groshap or Knowing who he iS-hls name is
not on tie Directory at WllismSbui 4, nor can she,
after search, learn anything OF hiu tnere she SAYS
she Is mnocent-that the whole " SAID testimony
was fa,Sc-and the divorce Was oht1ned after snc
had been put IN pron, anu was unable TO defend her-
self-thai she is sick and poor without friend OF
cent IN the world, and grieyed, addition, IN beng
deprived OF the society ot her Chdrcn-she asks
that the decree may be set aside td she be permit
ted to come IN and defend herself
Ii charged in the argumcAt, that collusion had
occurred between the then attorney who sent up To
lei him have charge of her defense which II was
said he never undertook, and tie attorney OF Mr. L.
The Judge, in passing upon the case, made some
severe remarks in relation 70 the charge OF coIiu-
sion, Sc.
Decree Of divorce set aside ar3 referred back to
the referee, Mrs {. TO be permitcdto cross-exainme
the Witnesses and present defense, dc.
Asior agt Thomas Il. Lec.-Mr. Lee
owns house and lot No La Fayette-place, situated
IN Colonnade row In erecting a rear building. II Is
SAID he cut off inches OF the stone stoop of NO 3
uudermin ed the fence and has bul 10 inches ON the
side o. the fence belonging to Nos Injunction was
issued 10 prevent him proceeding, anc motion argued
TO dissolve the injunction. II appeared that the
block of nine bulldings-each q feet wde-were put
up Il wears ago they were sold according to map
Mr l. contends that the fences were placed wrong
originally The Court doubted whether, after the
elaps. Of l. years, Ohe fences auc boundaries TO
each lot having been placed previous to the sale OF
the property the map rather than the fences coud
placed right The whole of the lots are to be sur
veycd and report made, the injunction IN the mean
time Ia stand.
Catherine " Forrest at. Ed,om For
esf-AIoton Is made to require Mr. Forrest to aban
don the suit for divorce he has entered against Mrs
I at Philadelphia or that proceedings on the cross
suit recently entered by him here be stayed The
argument VIII probably proceed this week