, 1870-01-18
RIGHTS OF DIVORCED HUS-
BANDS,

Publication OF %nEn IA oun where 1ne
Hesiuenco Of abe Defendant il no2
Anown-11otio to Set Aslde q Do-
cree ior Alleged EFaud-tsptuiou OF
tne Supreme Court II special Term.
From. the Ner York Timse Jan, Is
In tho diYtfce suit CT CDes. A. Ncl.oh rs Mar.
EaIes Nellop, already published IN our columns,
Judge Bartalt nr the Suprtnc Cour', nas ju,t
oellstred al nsettsHrg or:n,on. Tae casa came
TOD, to have a oecree o. divorce, granted soun
t!l1c ago, set attie On The s1ound shlt 1t Oh
ta'Eed without uot1ce to her tfne service OF the
It'll The tusth-r reason rnas al the proceedings
WeIe faise a. d frauo1lett thtOu1nuut.
TIE plaintiff IL the sE1t ls heid citsk or book
keeper II the employ or one OF oCr merchant
ri1. ceE, and. titce obtaining the tccr-e OF d.
Norce, has married a iady o4 nlen character. The
fLlloHs:
BAs*AFp, 1.-THE Notion TO get a.tde the ta5c.
neLf OF divorce grBEted IN this clIse IS i:ade
utoh two gI0uDds: ThAt the osdet for the pub l.
calon ef tie s1 m1 oDs Il VOID. Ard that the pru-
ten l3o Of The Code provides Tor tre Publication
OF the snma ons IN net1oCs for dirorce, Ia case,
prstcroed ~ la where tee oesenda1t cannot,
TIE u1ldayl1s mu.t sho ine rss,aencs
Of 1he teieldan', or shus It IL neither kuoWp 10
lie plaintiff, Lor GEE. with rue exercise o: reasou-
ueIeDds1t keesa hltusel concealed, ic Tao al!I
cay,ts en- ehca tni. uTcer wis granted state IN
snottsnce :" hat due diligence was ueed to mad
TIE te1erdsht IN the State, ana that she could
cot BE- icuSt; ths: due diligence was ueea 10
Emo her Issidt nee, iEeffecuay That her last res
ebne. nnch place she nas nos ieis and "a naoa;.
tnele 90 lot fnom where she rs zone ar III MI
tea tues Ero"," There Is another a;arement
a. 10 general Aearea having been made for her
In Foliy.tecond ttteet, particularly at the house
IN h1ch she Fea.ded aoGe months be1oIe; thar.
atttr sl the search aud ttqalry she cannot b
1ound OF her residence a.eesta.neo- The pla!auns
allow specifically AID In detail wnera sie reside.
Nhen her .ast residence was known; the Inquiries
they ndde there MD elsewhere TO ascertain her
ful "a slo1 sst ~ eYs nsnc rpS %;i tasy a,s
ute; md these a1d3sIta can be considered on this
nouon, Is has been Repeatedly sdjudged In ca4es
On the judgment record alone, the pla.uun could
not tnsroonee additional At1!davlts IN support
q The oIlg19sl oEsa a bat wnsse me notlon 4
smda1tts, the platnt'1 may introduce atldlVlia IL
addition 10 lhone on which the order for puoltca-
ton was ade. l an entirely satisfied inst the
1alid 60 lar ns the 1rsi ground Of tue motion eoek
sseora. Alto the charge Of fraud, am Of ths
opnko that The defendant has wholly lalled 10
tnes lave beeo practically divorced: that she ia q
Souan Of eed character; That she i ga.tty or
adultet1. 1he rlooi Jpn tbls point Is orervneln-
IpG. TIE plA!n.fn, stLce the *oTce, has uax,.ed
y lady OF high character; the marriage cerel,ony
vas performed upon the 1ss OF September
Id q rs,t st pse .s of
p.peis Of III CITY; ana the deie1daat aims
!, u rot pElu NJ 5euoer las. that she discovered
II, si,toIeh pub1s1e.. originally In tpo papers OF
th:s CRY. He1 own stea Of hesaeffs the RtadAyll1
she ptoducxa, Al shs acsN et'n9 papers eoaTtuce
ne that The d1vo1ee 4eoarATng these parties
thoula not be o.storbed. Tae secosa marriage
Enlsl os regarded IA v4ic. a-d, under I'll the ciT
r1nt&atcex 10 set It as1at would he 10 In cs u
Eeolrahe II tuIJ upon a shouy ttnoce1k party. he
caute the iaA5 marriage Efs contracted bJ TIE lady
no u h1 prt sent Wile upon ths faith VI tue d.
F1rce, and, II the defendant failed 10 1eep her |
tesidecce IN tuch locality T. enable the p!asn-
nG to hsce1 tain her wnere1pouts, or II aha 3aljeI
o receive the copy EumGons ADD COMPLAINT, OF u
lee the psbl1rauuu IN two Of the ie1d1pE news. !
papsrs Of rn1a ctiy.-these failures aIe NOT The
aul OF the present wife, nor Of the plaintiff, and
/ UT be nIne By the deiendant, whose
e&6s becauee df the pinlniidb 4dnlter1, vhieh ne |
senIes, Ahe left him. aGd that they nave not CO.
laeireo sttte. Sic Goes cot pfeseEd sho had
rom trat tine to this regular employment, bus
FsA in tie hsbft Of recelF13K from 1iu on the
'5e CT AID 10 other pnoltc places the pi:rauce cf
s. 80 spd 30 EuN and then; taat Ane wa5 In |
Teas want, Jel never sued for divorce Eor |
ought ior alln ooT: And she says enc went uus |
1 the city " plaintiffs reqnelt. The more I re.
ect upon the case and examine tt tho better am
ar&fed thai justice haA been done as veil u Il
Al be Adn tnttteted BY human laws, which. al.
1oreh 1npe1ftcts are tne ontJ ones governing Ia
e Divine aFH would DO under sinaiiar ctrcum.
Esncet DO Eoe krows and, Iudz1rR ffo,n recrnt |
nm ples. they DO roE. T1e motion uusr BE-
ented. W