The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1858-05-02
An Extraordinary Divorce Salt In Troy.
From the Troy Daily Wing, April r.

From the Troy Daily Wing, April al
At the special term of the Supreme Court, held
Lucius E. Buckley VS.. Mary X. Buckley. The motion
was to set aside judgment of divorce before granted
on the ground Of irregular and fraudulent service Of
the summons by which the action was commenced
and the judgment obtained.
The plaintiff is an attorney and resides in New
York, was married to defendant May II. 1852, and
from that time to October q, 1885, lived together;
they had one child four years old. On the 9th OF
October, 1885, defendant took passage on Califor-
mia steamer to visit her mother at Sacramento; was
accompanied to the steamer by her husband, who
spent the last hour before the departure in appa-
rently friendly and afectionate conversation with
her. In that conversation the plaintiff expressed his
qualification that good opportunity had offered for
her to visit her mother. When the order was given
on board for a persons not bound to California to
20 ashore" one of the witnesses saw the plaintiff
at the moment of bidding farewell embrace and kiss
his wife, and then hand her a package. This pack
age was small tin box, closed, covered with paper
and the paper sealed. At the time of handing this
package to the defendant the plaintiff informed her
that the box contained present for her mother and
also note for herself he requested her to be care
full of the present, and to deliver it safely to her
mother
After the defendant had passed Sandy Hook, and
was out at sea- her curiosity Induced her to nnseal
delivered to her. Upon opening the box she dis
covered therein a summons directed to herself, as
defendant, and in which her said husband was the
plaintiff filed out in the handwriting OF her husband,
and signed by himself his own attorney, contain
ing the usual notice to her that action was there
by commenced in the Supreme Court; that the COM
plant would be filed in the clerks office in Saratoga
county, and that if she failed to put in answer in
twenty days the plaintiff would apply to the Courtfor
the relief demanded in the complaint The said box
also contained letter to her, informing her that
the action was to obtain divorce and that he Cthe
paintih) had witnesses by whom he could prove the
necessary facts The said box contained no present
to her mother, nor anything but the said summons
and letter.
The material portion of defendants statement
was NOT denied 1t was denied by plaintiff that he
"kssed his wife, at parting and it was said she re-
ceived the sealed box from Bulkeys clerk, who was
present and not from Buckley himself. Arriving at
Aspnwall (he first landing of the vesseD, she made
effort to return, but such was her condition IN
body and mind that her friends demonstrated against
it. She could find vessel which would return her
to New York in twenty days, nor had she pecuniary
means to secure passage. She held through TICK.
cts to California She kept on her Journey resided
in California short time, and returned to New York
about the middle of January, 1857, and did not see
her husband until after the decree of divorce was
granted. She made attempts to see her child, but
not permitted to do so. This statement the hus-
band contradcs She also states that the plaintiff threat
ened her. she should attempt TO set aside the de-
cree that he had witnesses at his control by whom he
could blast her fame, and that he made various other
threats OF which she stood fear Also, that he made
her two propositions one was, she would keep secret
what had ranspred about the decree and would raise him
IS GOO be would give her the custody OF the child the
other that II she would raise him 81 400 no would get
from the Clerk of Saratoga county the record OF the d.
vorce snd thus oblcrate all the evidence OF its exist
The first Of these propositions the plaintiff Denies
the last one he does not.
Justice Potter before whom the suit tried, made
lengthy review OF the case. Al question OF Law he dc
cided that the plaintiffs summons was not legally served
After stating fully the objects and ends OF serving op
posing parties with summonsto afford time and opportu
niy TOR defence-Judge Potter said
think that human ingenuity may be challenged to
present the parallel Of this case where any one BY de-
nd nv aid of AuIO
csson and by the pretence Of employing the process OF
the and the forms Of law has been enectuay
disfrsnchsed, outlawed and cut OF from oil relief, a.
that which this presents this judgment Is permitted
10 stand by secret and cunnnsly devised stratascm,
he has dccoy ed dcienccess woman into condition OF
entire hcplessness and while ensnared has perverted
the OF the process Of the court to the commission Of
unhallowcd fraud upon her rights, and under cir
cumsances Of unparalleled heArtessness and cruelty
Nor the moral aspect OF the case relieved by the fact
that the victim OF this injustice was the wife OF the plain
tin. TO whom at the solemn altar no had pledged his
hoest vows TO love CHERISH to protect
also the mother Of bis offspring sufficient for the
10 know that the act which he calls the service OF
. summons, and upon which be based his decree,
sense q legal service but was fraud
imposed by him not only upon the defendant, but also
upon the court and deliberately entered into its solemn
records this pretended service was made 10 the man
ncr detailed by the alldayits, his clerk by whom was
effected in swearing 10 due service was guilty OF most
deliberate fasehood not OF legal perjury and the plain
i who doubtless planned the scheme, aud who, knowing
its nquy ayaled himself Of its uses, Is responsible to
the charge OF moral not legal subornaon OF perjury
To tolerate for one moment act fragrant and wicked,
10 be contaminated by one over whom the court can cx
crcsc s control 10 pass unrebuked does not oomport
with the idea OF pure and honest administration OF Jus
tec Such rcproscb while In the exercise OF the power
with which have been invested, shall not suffer at my
hands The service OF the summons and all suoseqnent
proceedings this action udng the judgment and de-
cree OF divorce is set aside, with costs