The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1851-05-16
Court OF Common Pleas.


VERDICT or TEN THOUSAND DoLLARs-ATrEMPT 10
ERIBE A JUROR.
MAY H.-Gsorge a. sa1Pf g. Edward 7. S-dT-ky.-
This action brought by the plaintiff against the
defendant for enticing away and hsrboring his WIFE,
The trial has been most protracted one
Mr. Cochgune having summed on the part OF tile
defendant and Mr Sehaffer behalf Of the plaintiff
Judge oodTuh proceeded 10 charge the jury ia this
ease which has upied the court eight nine
dayr and OF his observations the learned
judge said that the first question for them To- inquire into
wasIs the person with whom the defendant IL charged
with entcing away and harborng and who called Mrs
scherpf the wife OF the plaintiff This involves the
question what Is necessary to form valid marriage I'm
this Stated IL not necessary that there should be
any particular form or ceremony performed Undue
zion Of the parties into the marriage state. However
tuous society to surround the institution with such
badge honor TO distinguish II from meretrcous asso
catior and though deemed essential in countries
by the religious character OF the institutions and how
ever regarded by many ordinance Of religion,
quring the Office Of its minstcrn this State such
forms ceremonies essential But ii Ia necessary
that there hould be agreement between parties
to be to each other husbsr d and wife. consent to
dwell together il not enough consent to cohabt IL
enough The consent pass the eye Of
friends Of the public, by the Of and wife. IL
not enough There must be consent TO become and be
husband and wife. This agreement, however, may be
inferred from the acts and declarations Of the PARTIES
and from their conduct towards each other and in the
present case the jury determine, from the evil
dence what the relation between the plaintiff and
the woman in question There is evidence that they
lived together for years exhibiting others all the
appearances which mark them husband and wife
they have He'd each other by those appelatons they
held themselves world their
friends and the family of the woman husband and
wife. The woman who disavows the relation has
borne the plaintiffs and rendered him the voaun
tary service suited to the condition Of wife From this,
in the absence fcontrary evidence the inference
ranted that there sufficient agreement between
them. whether accompanied with cerrmonias not TO
constitute marriage To this it urged that ut
tender the woman enticed from her home, and
persuaded to n life Of ution to this plaintiff with
ont any mutual agreement to be and wife; and
the evidence that there actual marriage, Is
found in her made since She left the pain
hat ha mi rfs.I N To Ia iaxy
that Is produced who knows the fact that any
marriage took place. Such circumstances not ncon-
ssent with the idea private marriage agreement,
yet they of sign ac when II marriage
their intention, there motive for conceamcnt
And fit be true that the Intercourse between these
ties illicit and unlawful their conduct subsequently
il not irreconciable for IL may well be that whether
wife mistress. she would adhere to him long he
would afford her protection. and long she will
irg to submit herself 10 him These circumst may
be taken into consideration II the jury find that she u
the wife Of the plaintiff their inquiries will then be d.
reced TO other parts Of the but IL not then their
inquiries stop there II the person in question Is not
the wife the plaintiff there OF the case
the defendant tiled 10 verdict III they conclude
be his wife the next question is Did the defendant
entice her from her husband or did he haror her know
ing her TO be- the plaintiffs wife Ii. through the de-
eudants influence she refused either to
return TO her husband, to prevent him from living
with her the defendant also liable The learned judge
here reviewed che evidence with his usual cea-ness and
impartslity; ard to the question Of damages
cluded BY saying that IT. under the views he had sug
gesed the jury found the female in question be the
Plaintiffs wife and that the defends cntced her from
her husband Or Influenced her 70 remain away from him.
the plaintiff il entitled 10 the value her
vices aid assistance and comfort. wife, TO be judged
Thy The jury with the best light the evidence fur
nishes for their guidance; and If in that case
they find that the defendant instisated by malice
or IL will tovaIdr the plaintiff in using his influence for
sucb purpose they may give such damages by way Of
example restrain the defendant such invasion Of
thu rights Of cth suited to the aggravated charac
ter of the wroi he has committed
The jury then retired about o'clock but not having
agreed at the rising Of the court the judge directed
sake verdict TO be rendered in the morning