The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1866-05-13

square Presbyterian church. was also read In which
that he married the plaintiff defendant the
It'll of October 1855 Plaintiff an attendant at his
church On 9th of arch 1896 he received letter
from the lady in which she requested letter Of dms
sal from his church. and recommendation TO the Pres
byterian church at New Rochelle In reply DR.. Adams
called her attention TO the fact OF notice which he had
In the papers announcing that she had procured
divorce from her husband, and requested TO know on
what grounds such divorce granted In she
DR. Adams then examined the Judgment roll and found
that the divorce had been granted the ground OF
adultery: The statement Of Or. Adams concludes with
number OF years. and could vouch for his character.
He totally dsbeeves the allegation adultery being
committed ny the reverend gentleman.
Mr. Adams also read an affidavit made by himself set
ting forth that he was attorney for the defendant and
had examined the Judgment roll finding the name of
MI o. A. Howes, 70 Nassau street, attached thereto
attorney for plaintiff in the suit for divorce. Deponent
went 70 the office Of NJ Howes and he assembled the
stairs saw the words ''Mr Howes lawyer" on card.
The Idea struck deponent that IL the
Howes mentioned In an advertisement which he had
seem as foows-Divorces obtained without publicity,
and actually without fee till legal divorce ia obtained
Consultation free Howes, attorney and counsellor.
rs Nassau street, Deponent then went up stairs and
lawyer and commissioner Of deeds" and on an:
other sign the words an. Howes, lawyer"
there Mr. Howes, whom he asked II he was pa,ntis
attorney in this action. He mr. Howes answered in
the Affirmative On beng asked as to where the person
was who had made affidavit in the judgment roll to
the mailing Of the summons and complaint to tho Rev.
Mr. Saxton, Mr. Howes said that he was formerly boy
in his Office and did not know where he could found
at present Mr.. Adams then asked where Francis F.
Smith, the witness who had testified to seeing the de-
PENDANT IN house Of prostitution in January 1882 was
to be found when Howes replied that he did not know.
supplemental affidavit of Mr.. Adams shows that
examining the Judgment roll he ascertaned that Francis
adultery of defendant, and that his residence set
down at No. SO Ludlow street. The gentleman here
introduced another deposition Of party who had lived
those premises for years. and had never heard OF or
known Francis +. Smith,
These the principal papers laid before the court
THE LADY's VERSION OF THE AFFAIR.
Mr. John D. McGregor read the AFFIDAVIT Of Mrs. Sax
ton, as follows
Anna A. saxton being sworn, said she is plaintiff in
this action That she is twenty years Of age and the
mother Of two children That plaintiff and defendant.
Forty-seventh street. in the city Of New York, from
April 1851 to the latter part Of February, 1882 when
absolutely deserted and left ,dspo
In Fortyseventh street, New York city That during the
time deponent and defendant lived with depo
they. were all supported by deponent's father
wholly, the defendant during the whole OF said time
S1s sr eS s n latter
February, 1852 defendant deserted and left deponen
giving deponent no opportunity whatever to 60 with
ruary, 1862, deponent and defendant had been living
very nnhappily together often not speaking to each
other for weeks at time That after he left deponent
began to feel herself burden upon her father and
quenty wrote to the defendant to send her her
support and again urging him to provide place to live
in, offering him and TO live with him at any
place. That since February 1862 has sent to deponent
not to exceed $3.50 for the support Of herself and her
two children for four years That about eighteen
months ago after deponent had urged the defendant
over and over again, by letter to make some provision
for her. deponent went to Norwchtown Connecticut TO-
the defendant personally and to urge him person.
ally to provide for her and to offer personally to live
with him. That deponent at said time found the de-
PENDANT at Norwchown, Connecticut, and did then and
there personally urge upon the defendant to provide for
her and offered TO live with but he answered deponent
he the defendant should send for her. dcponent
obliged TO and did return to New York the same day. and
without even enough to pay her return fare That from
from the defendant except twenty dollars, which de-
ponent returned and refused TO receive about the time
she had made up her mind TO apply for divorce against
the defendant Deponent further says that she Is posi-
tive that defendant in New York city during all Of
the month of January 1862 and up to the Goth 25th
OF February 1862 and deponent fully believes that he
committed the acts OF adultery charged in thscompant
herein. That in January and February 1892 deponent
remembers distinctly that they were living In Forty
seventh street. New York city, but very unhappiy. rs
before stated Deponen further says that she has always
felt decacy in discussing the subject OF her husbands
adultery: which was the reason she did not fuily
set forth her charges 10 DR.. Adams. That with the
exception of about one hundred and fifty dollars aforc
said deponen: has with her two children been entirely
supported BY her father That this divorce was obtained
entirely at deponents own suggestion after she had
heard Of the adulterics of the defendant and without
any influence from any person Deponent further
that she has whatever for the prosecution Of
perry no trade nor business The defendant has no
property in the State of New York but has large pro-
perty, large school institute and grounds in Norwich
town Connecticut Of the value OF about ten thousand
dollars ANNA A. SAXTON.
The dispositions of Mrs Susan F. Livingston Mr. and
Mrs Higgins father and mother Of the plantif1,
roboratng the statements made in the affidavit Of Mrs.
Saxton, all placed before the Court.
Judge Barnard to Mr. McGregor-Have you any afida-
Wits corroboratng this allegation rs to adultery
Mr. McGrepor-They would not give me time, sir. /
have done all in my power to get this witness Smith,
here.
Judge Barnard-In divorce cases in future shall
pei all witnesses TO before and give their evil
dences in open court There shall he references
by If people too respectable TO into court
then let them keep out OF IT, shall have to adjourn
this until this witness comes in Then he must
satisfy conclnsvely 10 the truth Of his assertions
and the other side have full opportunity OF contra
dieting him.
After some further remarks Of counsel the case was