New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1859-03-19
THE RRY DIVORCE CASE.

Harrisburg, March I6.--A protest from Mr. Horace
n. Fly, Of which the folio sing Is copy, vas led
besose the Committee on Divorce lsst evening:
vReTgsT OF HORACE D. FRY, AGAINST THE REPORT
OF rsE MAJORITY o. TIRE DIVORCE cONNiTTEE.
The memorial OF Horace 3. Fry, Of the city OF Pnii-
s1Spbia 10 the Honorable the House OF Representa-
Syes Of the State OF Pennsylvania.
Whereas Am duly aovised that the Divorce Coui,
niitee OF your honorable body has adopted ana VIA
ppolt The annexed Pre- a be and Act for the Di'ooe
ofny,eH and my wife Emily l.. Fry, sobmit this my
solemn Protest against that sctiop | ne presume
ssa act were published in The TRIBUNE On fi'u0y
March Is -, ...L -. :,
tskss no snec16c copuizanoe Whatever OF tne pStl4Oh
Of Mr. Enily l.. Fry referred by your nonyI sue
70 the Divorce Committee, and upon the % aos' Vi
Which btIg the Only ssoIh S'Is ssooabS sIosc:ed
Cornuittee 10 port while sssgnipg any causes
WHAT yer therefor. The Committee, ~ yhofins Dns
crave matters reei,ed in hrs. H. IL. Fry PeuEon'
;.no,sd The record cor fdedt ~ them Dy yonr hon
s.sble hodv: an assumption Of power, az 1 humo'y
s.hm. contrary 10 parliamentary use, violat on OF
,~rsopaI rights In this instance, and, as pIecedeht
kspeht with danger 10 the public interests. ne Ae-
~st,sns in that petition either true or false.
9,e ,our honorable body, IS arbiteT, and myself as
The Marty affected by them, require positive eydsnce
Of ssb truth Htbey are false, both the petition ard
the object sought by it fail together.
protest agsnst the assertion in The SAID preamble,
nstuy "h6ppiness will be promoted by divorce
up1tr the circumstances Of the csse.
IYespectfDly, but empbatiealy, deny the right OF a
CcDuittee Of the Legislature to constitute itself q
jadge of what Will promote my happiness, and to
npose upOn ne the Consequences OF ia judgment
1 protest against the assertion a. untrue-l, ana
alone being the judge Of the secrets OF my own hsait
vbi1h while sm free citizen Of this Commonwealth
AID gnts Of cIime there is no power under the On
vtituion competent TO determine, and 10 0se az the
basis Of proceeding affecting my character ana NY
dsme site relations.
I aver mos. solemnly-sn averment which no one
hss apy VARIANT 10 gainsay-thst go lar from any nap
pipe,s bting promoted by your act dVorclDg myself
and my wife, IL will be them oct grievous aiiicnon
which the exercise Of your will can impose upon me-
Further do protest, that SO far from the lne r-
ats nj the pub and the morals Of society beng pro-
noted az the preamble alleges, by such an act OF the
I<sislsture il WHILST at the very root OF both a.
The integrity oftbat holy compact upon 9hch not only
The morale, but the existence Of society, depend
prsy that 1t be remembered that my wiie mas maze
certain very serious charges against me as husoano
sot Of which is IL pretended has been borne OUT
BY any psunble testimony whatever while TO gre ~
s1ttbt they are utterly imprObabe 10 part clearly self
contradictory; and IN some Instances actually proven
70 be wiully and wickedly false by unimpeached W.T.
asstes. While too, your hAls have been polluted WIN
anonymous bels upon me, printed and lad upon your
aesLs insulting alike to your sense OF decency and
Justice and designed by the most infamous slggesAOn
10 asst the attempt, against which am oeiehdlng au
that IL dear to wnile this is the iect am YET oe
MED any process pei the production OF testimony
which have assured your committee, who present
this Act Of Divorce, 10 within your jursolctOo, ana
sufficient to make evident all that equity may demand
in this case am thus denied say the right acc I'd
ed even 10 q criminal 10 have Whatever msy be a.
legged against me substautated by the beat possible
proof and similarly rebutted.
Vel under al these unprecedented disadvantages,
have proved beyond any contradiction, that the vile
Who presents herself before you impeschiDg my mar
Nal @, uct had formed an illicit attachment for an
ether msD, only tao weeks after her marriage WITH
me- ana held, while under my Own roof asurreptluous
and smstoIy correspondence with him. Of the most
- All suDUOTter
present proceeding against me is father who, by his
svn confession, makes mem, OF havlng onerei no
obstacle to that correspondence and her only wit
Dets that very candestine lover, proved 10 % sucn
shle pno er bis hand and her own. THIS is the true
state of the case before your Honorable Body.
submit the question, if my wife hsd gone to the
utmost extent of GRIMM Atty and had then applied Tor
divorce on grounds identical with those now before
you; and even If II were admitted, by both OF us, that
ne oosld not again live tOgether-I submit the ques.
tes end entTest your serious consideration oil IL 10 all
It's ksarings, whether you would, In such an extreme
ease that be Onpetent to affirm mat myhapp'oess
would be promoted by divorce, and that therefore
should be granted at her instance, and contrary 10 my
opposition. II this be reason for divoIclng man
seaintt bis consept-thst the Legislature thinks ms
happiness would be thereby pIoUoted-who is any
loreer safe in bis marriage relation lt 10 only need
fol for fabless wife to desert her husband, rs mice
has done present charges against him. rot one proved
tue and proved false, and then your Honorable
Body becomes qualified TO decide that the husoands
postion 10 his most solemn circumstances! What, i
AK 10 col iugal security, faith, hOnor-whst are
the morals of the family circle OF the great pubic
10 gain by such principle and such proceeding az
thisi
Further: protest against the very first sentence Of
she raid preamble opposed 10 spnted facts IL
- asserted that within few weeks after my marriage,
my.eh and my wife "did separate. The word sep
srste," a. therein used, conveys the meaning OF
mutual parting, phieh IS not true. We did not sep
sraie. Ny wife abandoned me against my prohlbiloa
She fled from my home while vas absent az my
daily labor. She desdted me aud continued her de-
psrtiop though costnued to live in tbat same hone.
Thus We did not separate, as the preamble asserts;
end the assertion cannot stand in it without perverg
truth, denied nowhere else, and by NOBODY NO, not
even by my wife herself.
Further: protest against the assertion 10 the said
preamble that my wife and sef never be recon
eeS. SO far 1t refers 10 me, 10 Is grstu ous, snce
alone am competent 10 speak for myself in t1is re-
gard. Ii can hsrdy be said that any mau oct of the
Legislature can affirm for me that our dsrences
hresepcsble; and if TO- there is nothing the office
Of legislator which enables him to do So IL may be
true. Bat this probability is no warrant whatever for
the practical CONCLUSION that divorce should noS be
enforced upon me.
Lastly, protest against the principle and practice
announced in the said preamble. They have prece-
dent in the statutes of this Commonwealth. No anal
ogies, either in the spirit the forms of justice egs
kive or Judicial. No pretext in reason. No color of
right. tits the first instance in any civilized comDu
Riy-snd God grant il may be the lsst-in which the
doctrine has been annouDced much less urged for the
adoption Of body Of lawmakers that wrong Is its
own proper and ultimate Justification and that tae
ss<ed sanction Of Law shall the purposes Of the
wopgsoer, ipdorse patent peIjuIes, and purify repu
tAtion stained by wsnton shsmes; while It operates to
Aspene the character and crush the claims OF the in
peeent. HORACE Il. Fry.
Pl.siss.sa. March Il, Issa
.~-