New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-08-25

parties.
5. IL. piscs appointed was di'tan. from ta' ie
Ike only witness chosen to bc;pr.sept, "a done oil
The daug 70 Il The elaiu,Att.
s. The witrsss Is oatIadicted by her WI state
mtrts sde under oath at different ii aes Al y o.hsf
evidence.
q There IL no sufficient Identification Of the a. ,.
dert no act ii recognition the part Of the clergy
Insu out only resemblance indicated
:. The certificate Of the marriage Aiordsao eviiescs
Of iGeI tica;on.
The certificate is incorrect a. 20 the name OF ,bo
place of his nativity.
O. There were Suspicious circumstance. attending he
tiaIssCti
10 The marriage was not confded BY the claimant
to any member ct her family, one.
H. There wac no private or public acknow-
,dgment no cohabtaton, bat the alleged p,rtes
Ey,d single persons
r. On tie part OF the claimant there were con.
nd. B,al laons with another person in respect TO
whom the dc cedent charged improper intimacy
49, The terms of the settlement OF the suits alleged
10 have led to the marriage are in writing, and ex-
Guide the assertion d other terms.
a. The marriage took place after the settlement
had been concluded and carried out.
I5 The claimant executed written instruments to
the decedent in her own name, after the marriage.
She assigned Judgment, he drew check to her
order; she ibdoised It, anc be swore to affidavit
in hich she was described BY her own name.
To- AT the settlement OF the suits she stipulated for
q tnew lease Of the house.
H. Shortly before the decedent's death she released
all causes of acton and abandoned her agreement. for
4 lease.
ard made repeated declarations against marriage.
10. lie was determined to compel her to leave the
pJemses ard new lease 10 another party was about
ia be executed.
80. The marriage was first announced after his
destb.
This is not n case where the proofs have left the
A...tk Nal. r.tx.o fhau
sufficient 10 affirm ID, marriage but IN my view they
utterly negative and oyertrIn ii. There l, not soii-
tary -n of that rtIatOn, but at every point facts
stand out wholly Inconsistent with matrimonial
union from the I'D d October until the dececent was
carried 10 his grave. Speech, writing, and actions
which express m ore tIan Ell her-cOnstanty proclaim
Ii at the parties were cir Gle.
We find the decedeLt and the claimant at one
tine, upon terms of mutual kindness, attention and
daily intercourse. This concord was unbroken until
on the one eide Jealousy and the other suspicious OF
trcachery and improper dealing gave il blow from
which il never red. From that period until the
decease Of DIR. Burdel, can discover nothing but
mutual strugge-Cn tAe part OF the man TO eject tne
woman iom the house, and relieve himself from her
presence and inuen and the part OF the woman
uHceasiDg and persistent determination not 10 De
crven from the strcg position she occupied IN tne
very center of his hOUe He charges her with steal.
ing-she essails him with actions for SANDER and
breach of promise of marriage, and then the ,oGaoas-
tan.s draw off, and tie suits are discontinued. AT
this point the claimant ssts that marriage was Con.
sumnated-not through affection, for the absence OF
that is apparert-but through fear, by Intimidation
in fact by coercior-he decedent having presented
TO him two alternatives to marry his assailant or 10
face her attack and debnd the suits. But 1t must De
remembered that the sits, II continued Woud nave
been likely to affect til, Plaintiff character as well as
the defendants and tie latter might therefore well
doubt whether they would ever be pressed, even II he
remained passive. The application of the Doctor tor
subpoena to Mrs. Cunningham on charge OF stealing,
-. that ha had
G Golsdd'' on both sites, the terms of the
comprc se are committed to writing, and the settle
ment was closed the ODD day OF October hvs days De-
in the arrangement as compulsory marriage would
hardly have been left by suspicious ana vlgilant
party to be executed subsequently. The supulatons
Of settlement between antagonists are ordinarily con-
SUNNI ated on both sides simultaneously Indeed, II
marriage were understood as part OF this adjustment,
there uld have been no formal adjustment at all the
marriage itself, uniting the parties together, would
have iDstantaneousy given the wife nome Ia ner
husba1 DIS house without rent charge would, by its
necessary effect have blotted out all causes OF action
aud rendered useless and futile all agreements and all
releases. The whole process o. ueae,n,ns ,aesc
against even voluntary marriage intended shortly TO
BE- solemnzed and is utterly repugnant to compul-
soIy marriage insisted upon as one OF the terms OF the
setfle m. Mt Let US look moment at some Of the facts.
The decedent had, in the Summer, ceased 10 take his
meals in the house Did he return after the alleged
maIiagcl He had spoken Of Mrs. Cunningham
es an artfuI and dangerous woman. Did ho
desist from such representations to hi. con-
fdential frlerds after re alleged marriage! Was
it his wife be thus characterized and abused in tue
most hitter and yenomors terIIs--a woman whom 10
had taken to his bed and whom he expected to recog
niye in a few months before the world by his name,
and as the partner Of his station and wealth was IL
proposed wife who took new lease OF the mouse IN
the agreement ot Oct3ber rs was II proposed
wife whom he desired To sign the unexecuted release
of all causes of action On the 18th OF October WG
il his wife with whom he was dealing ON the l4th oi
November, when he drew his check to the order OF
"E A. Cunningham, and she Endorsed II IN Inat
name and when, by the same name and on tne same
day she astgned to hin the Burtell judgment, and ON
the I9tli ~of Ncvembe. appeared before Commits
s.oner ard Acknowledged the instrument, Mr. Thayer,
The counsel, swearing to her identity as Emma A.
Cunningham Wac it his wife the dscedent de-
scrbed in his affidavit sworn the oath day OF Novem-
Der and found in Mr.. Eckels possession, as Mrs. L:
A. Cunningham" Was it his wife who he feared
would renew the sutsn January, and who signed the
release ,of January q in the name f. A. Cunning
ham, Again, he was about letting for the
ensuing year the portion Of No. IL Bond
street not occupied by himself, reseryog
come apartments for his use. AS cary Us june
he hsd begun the struggle TO be free Step by step
NAY be traced tho ssgTess of bis efforts TO remove
The claimant and finally when, after scene 0! vio-
ence on Saturday Jan. "a, he procured q written
agreement to surrender the premises on the Ist OF
May, he proceeded to eesuDmate Inc io9g penu"s =,
Fridsy, Both, announced the papers ready Tor sigma
ture the next day. These facts are not to DC mug,
taken his purpose wss understood by her, declared
10y him. Were these two persons standing al TINS
point Of antogonrm husband and wife Were they
mutually conscious Of lawful marriage Here was
woman of energy AID determination, supposed to be
equal to the task Of srcing him into compulsory wed
lock-aeged to be th,n holding in her hands the irus
of that bold proect-ive.ted with right of dover in
bis estate title to ABIDE in his house. and receive
nain.enance and suppat-able at any moment to pro-
claim her rights the public and enforce them before
the eve of signing an instrument which in few months
would eject Sel aud her family and introduce Others
in their stead. That little paper signed 6y the Rev;