New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1858-01-22
LAW INTELLIGENCE.


THE case came up abou. 10 o'ci0.k Cd Ta1s,dsy,
according 70 adjournment
Alfred Shegoene vas called a. witness.
Before he gave his testimony Judge Bsre5ur, W.T.
has been retained by the rela;or, stated tbs. he
mother Of the alleged prisoner had at fir. encouraged
the msrsge, but Of late mad opposed il, rather had
wished il 10 ne postponed, when the marriage at length
took place, the mother exercising her authority a.
Guardian drove the husband from the house ard bv
the same authority induced the daughter to depar TO
psr.s unknown. This exercise OF authority il j.
claim. by the petitioner constitutes restraint or m
in construction ofaw sl lent 10 en,itle Mr.
Tsyor to q writ of habeas corpus. his - the prnc-
Die laid down in the case Of Barry sgt Mecn, il i.b
HiPs Rep.
The Ia,t- stated above it was proposed to prove
BY Mr.. Sh-gogue.
i set forth in Judge Barbour above remark wa-
not sufficient to authorize this VII. Mr.. Taylor
moreover, has no right 10 this writ because, a. The
respondent alleges, lie was never legally married 20
Miss Hawlcy.
The Court ruled that it was proper 70 admit
9, d.nce 70 prove the exercise of this authority by
the mother, as guardian-it is a kind OF restra Mt
which the law recognizes. How much weight !. 70
be attaced IN i is 10 be determined by the Court.
Mr.. Shegogue then answered that he was present az
the marriage; witness WAS acquainted Win all the
parties TO the proceeding; had been acquainted with
Mr. Taylor about year, and the Oeher parties about
street; Mrs. Taylor Emma Ha~ieyl, NJ. Geo. T.
Taylor, W. Sterling Yard, Mr.. Frederick Heming
the clergyman and witness; Mr.. Taylor and Emma
Hawey stood up before tn. clergyman, who married
them in the usual form.
o. What else took place
MIR. Busteed-I object to the Question, they might
have had fandango there, Or a miracle M bt have
been performed, but neither have anything TO do with
this.
The Court allowed the question, and witness stated
that their hands wer. joined, after which they de-
parted in a carriage. The marriage took place on the
9th Of january, INST
The marriage certificate was shown witness, who
identified it as the one given the occasion of the
marriage.
Cro-e-cSamined-Q by NJ. Busted. How old sre
Won Mr.. Shegogue 4. 20 years.
Mr.. Busteed-What does Taylor do
Objected to by Mr.. Scars
Judge Sutherland-The question s improper. Il i
of no consequence and it seems he has not done any
thing much beside getting married. LaughterI
Mr.. Busted argued in favor OF the admssleIbty 81
the question.
Mr.. Busted II en- changed the form of the question:
and sked what was the business of the Taylor whom
Won know Answer-He was Il clerk III a store;
made his acQuant ance at the house OF Mr. Crck, No.
lO5 Greenwich street, about year since; Mr. Eugene
Shegogue (brother of witness and MIR. Thomas H.
Morell live at No. 212 Ninth street where the mar
riacc is alleged to have taken place; they are both
married; my brother il y years old; Mr.. Yard, who
brought Miss Hawey to the house to be married IS a
lawyer and Clerk of the Special Term OF the supreme
Court in this District; have known HIM * months
no person was present at the marriage but witness Mr.
Yard. Miss Hawley and Mr. Taylor; they were mar
ried somewhere between $50 and o'clock; L knew
Mr.. Heming who married thecoupe, only aiew days
before the marriage; went TO see nm at Jersey Wy
with Mr.. Yard and Mr.. Taylor: never saw him IN
pulpit have 10 personal knowledge that Nix Hem
ing is clergyman; he called on me the day before
the marriage at fathers house No. 81 Fourteenth
street: my father is an artist; Mr. Hemlng received
- before the marriage and so after; Mr.. Taylor paid
il the marriage occupied ab0u, twenty minutes; MIR.
Heming prayed the. occasion; the prayer lasted
about five minutes; he did not read irom any ""oh
Yard and Mr.. Taylor went away in the carriage with
the lady after the ceremony; signed my name to the
marriage certificate as witness, at my fahers house,
a day or two after the marriage the cerlhc@e was
written at Mr. Hemings house, on the outskirts o:
jersey City.
Mr. Busted then asked witness if he could RENE m
Der the first or last words OF the certificate JOB
jected to-. ,.
Mr. Busted proposed to show the utter unrelablity
of the testimony of this witness, owing to the weak
ness of his mory and this question was designed to
show this weakness. lQuestion admitted, as bearing
upon the identity Of the paper.
Wnness-I do not know the iirst or last words;
am sure that no other names than Miss Hawleys Mr..
ray ors and N. T.. Shegogues appear in the body OF
the certificate: put seal TO the marriage certificate,
thinking il might perhaps, be necessary MIR. Taylor
was not present when signed and sealed it.
After Mr.. Shegogues examination, the case was
adjourned until Friday at II IN.
Crane ast. Crane
This case came M again on Thursday on motion
made by Mrs Crane the plaintiff, to confirm the re-
ort of referee ordering tie husband to pay 500 for
the support of his five children.
The counsel ON both sides stated the case IN favor OF
their clients. Mrs. Cranes counsel, Mr.. Nathan klch
ardson, gave his account as follows:
Dr. Crane and his wife, about five years since, sep
arated by written agreement The doctor agreed 10
paw his wife $500 year for her and the chlldrens
support. Mr.. Crane subsequently commenced SUIT
for a divorce against her husband, who therefore
brought cross suit against her for the same purpose
The husband then ceased to pay the ssOo ana an APP
plication was made to oblge hun to pay alaInony 10
\ e. Ia obi flFnn
matter was referred to Judge Mason, before whom the
divore suits were pending The referee reported .'a'
Dr. Crane ought to pay $500 for the childrens NAM
tsnance. The claim tor alimOny was abandoned OF
the hearing because, Mrs. Cranes counsel alleges
the investigation of that question would have occu
pied a very long time, and 1t was desired that some
order should be instantly made in regard to the chill
dren who are said TO be suffering.
This is the report which il is moved to confirm.
Mr.. Patton opposed the motion, and gave his &C.
count Of the case.
He stated that Mrs. Cranes separation from her
husband was caused by the misconduct of the former
Tha. this misconduct had rendered tins clty uhouP
portable as residence for the Doctor. That he there
ore went to Paris with the intention OF establishing
himself in business, at which city he still resides. De
fore his departure he gave to his wife the househou
furniture Of his large house, and allowed heI " o
in the house itself for the purpose of keeping boardes
Ii is further stated the part OF Dr. Crane tnat sue
subsequently, let the house, receiving first 81 o anu
then 81 300 rent together with her and her children
board and the board OF one Dr. fuilgrapn. IN,
stated for the purpose of showing that Mrs. crane
cannCt be in want and her children cannot be sunefng
The confirmation of the report was resisted on the
ground that DR.. Crane is in very reduced circam-
stances and wholly unable to pay the amount OF wv
that the father in such circumstances has rghl 70
determine in what place and in what manner his chill
dren shall be supported: that DIR. Crane made an
offer to his wife in writing that, if she would allow me
children to live with his (Dr. Crane sister, IN Son
necticut he would support them. He also enerea 10
nav her.
seems, she refused to do 1t is also alleged that the
children suffering.