New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1869-07-14
THE COURTS.
TIE RIsHoP DIVORCE CASE.


Eleanor f. Bishop 9gt. Nathaniel 9. Bishop :
Superior Court-specal Term-McCun1, Jan order Of
THIS Court duly made and entered adJndging and
requiring the defendant to pay am0ny 70 the plahui.
To that order tho defendant refused obedience, ana on
ordered into custody until no purged himself OF MS
contempt by submission to the mandate OF the Court
cont and 0 K the Sfondant had
10 writ Of hdbeds corpus ana being brought
before another tribunal he Is released from the conine
ment which he committed, aud IN effect has re-
gained his liberty without making his submission
motion Is now made TO recOmmit the DEFENDANT
on the specific ground that the Judge In directing his
release acted without authority and in contraventon
II there was error in the original order which resulted in
the commitment OF the defendant, he had his redress
by appeal TO the General Term Of this Court, aud
thence To the Court OF ultimate resort. But that the
supreme Court has jurisdiction review the determine
appeal is proposition a. novel as It IS destitute Of sup
port. II II bo not an aront TO court OF coordinate Dig
illustration might say as well might disregard and
set at naught order Of Mr. Justice Sutherland as be as
aunu order OF mine duly made at tho Special
Term OF the Superior Court And beside the egalty OF
the Interference the interests OF Justice and tho dec0rum
OF judicial proceedings must be Rreyously impaired and
obsfucted by the alterations aud embarrassments 70
which the precedent Of Mr. Justice sutherland would IN
eytably conduct The duty OF the Courts OF this State,
the disposal OF prisoner produced on the return or
writ OF habeas corpus Is minuely and precisely defined
such Court or officer forthwith to remand such
party, II i shall appear that he IS detained IN
custody for any contempt specially and plainly
charged in the commitment by some Court,
officer or body having authority 70 commit Tor 1ho con;
Tho return To the writ allowed by Mr.. Justice Suher
land disclosed the fact that the prisoner was In Gus
tOdy for contempt plainly charged IN the commit
ment," and presume that learned Judge will hardly
deny that Justice OF the Superior Court has
authority 20 commit for contempt Though IL be
not at all incumbent 10 reproduce the evidence
on which, In the first instance directed the commit
meut OF the defendant. yet for the satisfaction OF Mr.
Justice Sutherland will say, II sufficient both in
the defendant pay the almOuy allowed the plaintiff
And exhibit tho character OF that evidence, well
TO show that the defendant could urge no claim
20 the indul gcuce OF the Court. l will advert
a single circumstance revealed In the plaintiffs
testimony A worthy gentleman OF this city in
destitute circumstances yielded 20 the opportunities OF
his little daughter that she might be permitted TO
tribute somewhat the support OF the family Accord
gy at her request he Inserted an advertisement In the
papers soliciting copying for yUuue lady, aud 70 that
proposal the defendant replied by the folio wing nOto
d0Aus BY NHg Would prefer the Of gentleman
three evenings week Uho would furnish with
would and have the society without labor
dgab please when
walk sad take together ard pleased
other gill continue acquaintance Yours Assger may be-
dear fr.endi M. c. BzLL, Station @.
In what the writer of this note Identified
with the defendant there need TO rotate IL suces
10 that he traced and discovered beyond the
sibly OF evasion From this shocking communication,
Is evident the defendant has ample for the
purposes OF prostutOn and am OF opinion that instead
he should be compelled 20 devote them ~ the support
Of his Injured and insulted wife.
The order OF the Court is that the defendant be recon-
mitted TO the County JAIL until he purge himself Of tho
contempt OF which he Is guilty In negecting to pay the
allmOny allowed tho plaintiff.