New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1865-06-20
Law INTELLIGENCE.
SUPREME COURT-CmcuIr-Juxs N-B,Sors y,sass
CLERKR.
LIABILITIES OF HUSBAND.


LIABILITIES OF HUSBAND.
Matilda d. Fiske axt Mellon Bailev
This action was for damages 0ccasioned by leav.
She had engaged board the morning Of ths aay Of Mn
baily aud had had dinner thero There doom e
ns o% ,b enc ps,a Sy each dooi ws as
path leading round to the other door The panA showS
out o. the front door In the evening she ws coming With
aside to the other door and while Leading the fell otb
e,.ts which had osso len open Close 70 the asssd
ui,e learned cross examination entered into
that the severe suffering the plaintiff experienced might well
sI'e from ns having been very early wife aud mother and
Al the conclusion Of the plaintiff testimony motion
made to dismiss the complaint the ground that Il did not
care being stranger second sh:s s: p.nsa
her by the defendants wife and therefore
and could S Ss min Ss an 1 s:as :t
ing inmate of the house. had right TO seek BY
either door and that under the old law and the law
stands the presumption that where the husband
lives With the wife he IL the head of the family and the
occupant Of the premises and this the
that the title Of the property in the wife, and the fa but
slight one aud the cistern easily ssen and avoided
AT the conclusion OF the the jury gave verdict for the
Mr. Dodge for p.n.is Mr. Bang. 70, ID, dssnS:n.
TIE WALTERS MURDER.
This morning Judge Ingraham rendered his de-
cson npon the motion for writ Of error and stay in the
both The following Is his opinion ~
Charles Water: AT. The People &C. defendants in error
n hi pi.a Th nr;.ons, w.s ,;d IN ,h s o. e,ros
sentenced to be executed the 10th Of April 1854
wit Of error brought The Judgment affirmed IN the
Supreme Court and siferwsrd 10 April 1865, the Judgment
was affirmed IN the Court OF Appeals. That Cour directed
the proceedings be RENTED with directions The Ssprsms
to the Court Of Session. to pa. sentence in accordance wb
the Judgment The General Term Of the Supreme
Court session. with aTeeions to pas. .ssnc:
in accordance with the Judgment The Court Of Gens,
Sessions the 18th Of Nay 1867 sentenced the prisoner TO b
executed on June %. 1885
The alleged error consists in the direction Of The o,
Appeals followed by the Supreme Court, in ordering the
Sessions to sentence the prisoner and In the General
Sessions TO the prisoner 10 death The 2th Section
OF the Chapter in regard TO wits Of error r. s. provides
where the Supreme Cont arms Judgment in capital
1t shall direct the sentence pronounced to be executed In
such tho time of execution had passed the Conf
could another day for the execution The Court OF APP
pea sh ia this Gaze ordered and either RENTED
the Supreme Court 20 fix the day Of execution,
1853 the a4th section osois referred to was amended b. add
ing TO proiso that the Appellate Courts shond have
power upon writ of error shall appear that the
yciou has been and regular to remit the record to the
Court in which such had 70 pass such sentence
thereon as the Appellate Cour. shall direct.
adopted The Supreme Cont could have ordered the
nce 70 have been executed and liked the day of execution
could have RENTED the record the General Sessions
The directions of the Cont Of Appeals
10 the Supreme 10 remit the to the Sessions
but at the time not
may be considered IS snrpu.agr a. only directed whu
would have been consistent with the law under simple ~
rmsive OF the Judgment Or If proper its force and validity
affected by reitpg the proceedings to the Sspes
Court he RENTED to the Sessions TO sentence anew
under either view II ssemer and directed % DO
Whist the prescribed for tie Supreme Court in arm
udgmen Objection /. 'aken TO the r~ntencs Of
the Sessions being full sentence instead OF merely h1inss
execution The Statute does the Sessions
thoy fl the dav bn to such sentence anew In sc
cordsnce with the judgment OF tie Appellate Court
This Was done in conformity with the statute The Ses
ou ia pass -Gch sentence ~ the Appellate Court should
direct The nns sentence lad become nuly, the time OF
execution having expired and the Cont Of Appeals
ordered the the prisoner
from the Ape,te Court by tue Court below IN &C
cord4noe with the statute.
Such direction given in the Rszky BY the Cour Of
APPEALS directing the Oyer and Teminer. The fact Of tho
direction through the Supreme Cosrt does
not H. my dsuen effect regularity the proceedings Ny
opinion Is that there the proceedings snd that
the application should DO ceuicd