The New York herald., 1864-08-07


The lury after celebrating for about nal an hour, re
turned verdict for the petitioner and assessed the dam
ages at =. 600.
Important American Divorce Cases De-
cided.
COURT PROBATE DIVORCE JUNE II.
Before sir p Wide.
Some Some dad AprLe oa.An application was made
In TINS fortnight that the respondent might
nave leave 70 and fe answer apon an affidavit
that he taat the pending against
hin unt March. 1893 that he then started from the
place where he resns in Canada iins TO come
TO Engaud 10 deeud but nat whea he arrived far
as Bostaa 10 informed thar the cause had been tried
and dc d been found against hn Tor 81 600 dam
The ordered to stand for turiner
aidaviis Ahdavits had since been ted by tue VIE and
ne father OF the correspondent up'n whom subst-
tuted OF the citation had been allowed, and tney
neposed that at lne lime when TIE citation was served
on hem ney pd not Know where the co respondent WAS
living, tha the fact Of having been commenced
not communicated To him till Just before the trial
when Y too late for him 10 be present at II.
Aiavits had been aed by the petitioner Zap
tam soue by is attornes Mr. ascoe ana by Mr. Deane
Baker Tie effect these aiaavits that the charge
made against the respondent by Captain Stone had been
Drought t ms knowledge day. before he had lett
Bldietgn Salerton, IN necem ner 1851
Mr. setrle Tor tue respondent now removed the ap-
plication.
Mr. iopes, or the petitioner opposed it. and conteuded
tn the sdaylts proved that Mr. Appleton Dsd lett Bud
eign consequence charge made
him INT OF pccinary difficulties that the
CITATION must nave en- brought 70 his kno Wedge by hs
family; that ne allowed TO appear Court ought
t. the Of the last trials ard that
this ws rea anappicaton on behalf OF the respondent
not Of the co respondent
The ia iee Ordi aary said he bad narrowly examined
tae aGavlt died on benaf OF The petitioner. TO see
wne her they shook the correspondents statement that
he Of The country when the petition was nled,
ana that he not aware that the citation md been
issued and ne found that they did mol come near the
mark bus, the contrary, seemed TO nnrm the
trutn Of the stateneot nsiderng the circumstances
under whcn he eft, and that he keeping out Of the
way Tor debt, It natural that his wife shou try
- thro" on peo' 70 VINO came 70 lhqnrs lor him.
and should refuse 10 have anything To do with the
citation. All the atdavits showed that the story he
told - 70 ms leaNing was 10 the main true. y had
been suggested thai the application made in the in
teret tie e~pondent and he had sed shat interest
sne could nave ~ Nc Appeton's az earance. lie vas
clnddy told by the lerned counsel for the petitioner
the last trial they bad the peDehi u Leading the
jury suppose that Appleton bad away because he
was guilty man and they wanted sal; 10 preserve tniit
benefit but what monsrous tnng 1t would be 70 al
os such false idea TO the mind Of the jury,
when u turned out that he wning 10 appear
and defend on these grounds ne should grant the
respondeuVs apDc cston but az no was now out OF the
country, and mgbt out OF the country again he was
unsuccessful IT must be upon the terms that he ioond
security or the ccsie OF the approaching trial As the
trial ought not 10 be delay ed the must be fled
within four days.
ASorHEn ANGLICAN CASE.
BdfndH rs BdG1idl, Dorm dSi McCiiSh--Tr. wambry
ap cared Tor tue petitioner. The petitioner former
ourreymsn moulder at poncseser The marriage was
in 1889 Al separation took place shorty afterwards
II sequence of the drunken habits OF the vie She
has since lei the lie of postitote. The petitioner has
snce lived America, and has recently saved sufficient
money 10 his present position Of provision merchant 10
enable him 10 present this petition Decree granted
SOUTH AMERICAN CASE.
King rs KING and Sdnips0n.-Ir. Wambey appeared
for the petitioner. The petitioner mining agent and
lives ~. Agnes, IN Cornwall. The marriage was N
1882 and there have been fve children The petitioner
iuenty ut abroad mining expeditions, and WAS
aosent for long of time. He made sufficient pro-
vision for tne sppor OF his wife and children duripe his
Rbaences and he placed them under the Of Mr. Samp
son acrpente Swing al the same place. Mr. Sarnrson
married man. an intimate iriend ~ the petitioner,
and 'cass leader Of the Wesley ee petitioner be-
ing member OF tbe body. In 1883 the petitioner
t. Cne aud did not until sSl. During bis
absence the pondect had chId OF WHICH Mr. Sampson
was the father.
Decree n,a, with costs against the correspondent.
Jyg MACE ~ THE nATRiM NAL "aIEG.'
COURT DIVORCE MATRIMONIAL CArsne, !usE 80.
Before the Judge ordinary.
Mac Us Mace and Roterts.-Mr. t.esey sFpearcd for
the petitioner; MIR. Seare aad Mr. HOME PsySc for the
ondent The petitioner is the veil kDswu prize
fighter "Jem Mace lie married the respondent Juiy
Isb1 and lived with her Until seiten,ber 1853 Prom
1851 until september 1883 hey we're living ut the old
King John pub 10 house IN Shoteditcb Belonging TO the
ue ,ttiouer They had -four chcren In sptember lsG3
separation TOOK place by the of tte respondent
aud deed Of separation executed }he petitioner
had paid some money TO the respondent for her naoie
nance under this deed and u proved that sncs the
separation she had cohabted with nan ed Roberts,
as hIs wife, in Gopsall street, tioxtsn.
The respondent had hed answer denying tho
charge OF adultery and making q counter charge OF
adultery against the petitioner In support Of tbs cpvn
ter charge witness ed Hicks gsoduccd 10 prove
that ew years ago the petitioner had carried on n
aduerous intercourse with selma Hart that he had
mad child oy her. and that be had paid her f6 aer me
brth Of toe child TO release himself frein any fuuro
cloifn ior ITS maintenapce.
The Judge Ordinary Of opinion ths, bsa the peti.
TONER and the respondent were proved 10 have been
guilty OF adultery and the adultery OF the petitioner
had preceded that Of the respondent and bad probaby
conduced TO IT, there for makipgths case
an exception TO the general rue that petition er who
hsd beon guilty OF adultery entitled 10 CO me 10
ths court Tor relief account OF the respoe tents
adultery.
The petition was accordingly dismissed.
BRirIss MORALITY NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. WIZ
AND IrCiTiNe TO ADULrRk~.
oouT yoR DIVORCE AHD MATRIMONIAL LONDON "a
Before the Judse Ordinary
Frhsn u.s. PicjtrN and Stsnmonds Mr.. G. A. Turner
appeared for The petitioner and Dr. swabey for the re-
spondent The pe,itioosr Who was the mate OF mer-
chant snip, prayed for dissolution e marriage The
respondent pleaded denis a the adultery charged The
co respondent did not appear The parties married
October 1851, and lived toGether n Wrapping until De-
cenosv, 1861, when The pstoner upsu Q voyage.
The petitiopsws father, Who ws wine msrchsnt a
Plymouth allowed the respondent twelve shiIlinss week
curing the petc0ers absence. HeariAg that she waa
nos conducting herself properly, ,hs petitioners father