The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1870-10-02
FASHIONABLE DIVORCE CASE.
Romance Of Foreign Travel-Piaintiff the Daugh-
tor Of Horatio King, ex-Assistant Postmas-
ter General-Defendan Chief Engi-
neer In the United States Navy
History Of the Case.

zbtu ultiuUy dHu Vic dIkuucHtS VI COuiiScA Cohi-
menced. The plaintiff. Mrs. Lawton Is the daughter
OF Mr.. H0rati0 King. First Assistant Postmaste
General under Buchanan: the defendant is one Of
the chief engineers OF the United States Navy. The
counsel in the case are Lieutenant Governor Cum
back, Mr.. william Wallace. General Benjamin Har-
ris0n and Senator Hendricks. The character OF the
case Will be understood from the arguments OF
counsel.
GOVERNOR CUMBACK's ARGUMENT FOR PLAINTIFF
The plaintiff IN this case for divorce on the
alleged ground or cruel treatment and failure by her
husband to provide for her support suitable to her
condition In ltfe We have proved the first charge
beyond question. 1t is not necessary, as our Su.
preme Court has decided In Ind p. los.
that physical violence must proved to sustain the
ceratiOn OF feelings, cold neglect, IL continued for
any length OF time. has been held to be enough.
seases These parties were married ' in Feb Feb
ruary, 1882; the defendant was in the war,
n . high position no1+,on IN the navy Of ch the
engineer. At the time OF the marriage he had pro-
perry worth $4,000, and was receiving pay at the
went to Boston, where he was stationed He gave
time to bridal trip or to those social enioyments
which usually attend. He sought cheap boarding
house In that city, where ne remained several
months. In the summer OF 1862 she removed to her
father's In Washington City, while he remained In
Boston, He never visited her but once at her
fathers house. Upon this point however, there Is a
conflict OF evidence Here was the beginning OF his
neglect. From her fathers she wrote him q letter,
which he answered In such q manner that produced
most violent grief and induced spell OF sickness
from which she did not recover for weeks This
letter she destroyed soon Us she read II. She was
about to give birth to child. He was notified OF her
condition, but remained away from her and never
went until despatch from his own sister
summoned him to the bedside OF his Wife, He re-
NAMED u few days after the birth Of his child and
then returned to his post. When her babe was few
weeks old ne directed her to come to Philadelphia.
accOmnQnied but her cOlOred Thew
took boarding at the La Pierre House. After living
together In Philadelphia for time he persuaded
her to return to her fathers house. 1t Is proved by
the testimony Of Mrs. Van Kirk, Mrs. Webster and
Others that In his demeanor towards his wife he
treated her with studied neglect. They give one
instance OF his conduct at sanitary fair In Phlla-
delphia, where he rudey insulted her in the pres
ence of number OF strangers. They were passing
through one Of the halls, when she made complaint
that he was walking too fast for her to follow him.
He turned upon her in rude manner and told her
dered to the Chinese seas with the Xsiatc
squadron. He had always shown disposition to
live as cheaply as ne could, and invariably
selected the cheapest hotels and cheapest boarding
houses that could be fOund He had made arrange.
ments to have farewell interview with her before
pointment With his wife, he Sent her farewell let
ter excusng himself for not meeting her according
five cents in postal currency saying that was all he
had Before starting he had arranged that his wife
should spend the period OF his absence In Europe
His farewell letter was cold, inhuman and insult
Ing document 1t breathes no words OF affection for
his wife or babe. An effort has been made to show
that she was exravagant In the expenditure OF
money while she was III Europe, but it has utterly
failed.
no such claim would be made IN argunent.)
The defendant has produced and read in evidence
many Of her letters. We are Obliged to them for
reading them. II supplies evidence for her. They
show him to be mean and nlggardly in his provision
for his wifes wants, and that whatever attention
and comfort she received and enjoyed in foreign
land came to her on account or her own personal
accomplishments, and were bestowed by her own
friends Madame Pouceaux was her friend and did
not know the defendant, and at her house she found
comfortable quarters and polite society, solely
account OF her own native good qualities During
all this time she writing him letters at the rate
OF one per week. In all her letters she spoke cheer.
fully, and dwet upon the pleasure she expected to
enjoy when she her husband ana child, should re-
turn to America and occupy home OF their own
She speaks OF the progress OF the child, ana sends
him its photograph with her own. and begs him
80 TO arrange affairs that he can return speedily
to his family. His responses to these gentle mis-
slves are all cold and formal. All his GOODNESS and
cruelty to her had not diminished her affection for
him. He had cruelty deceived her as to his means
and the amount of his salary, and compelled her TO
stint herself when there was necessity for it, In
a purely selfish spirit he wrote her Once:-"I have
had the cholera m0rbus and am very sorry that you
or my mother are not here to nurse me-"
When he returned to the United States he spent
Europe to JOIN his wife and child. Prompted by the
same spirit OF economy he selects the last and
London. He arrived IN London September "a. 1857.
He writes to his wife in Paris that day. telling her
he intended to stay a few days III London to ''See
hearted father and affectlonate husband, who has
been separated from his family three years
Instead Of rushing to the embraces Of his
London to 'see the sights,'' although
he was within twelve hours ride or
and tells him to remain few days In he desires TO.
He remains In London nine days, ana never so much
writes another letter. On the 4th OF October he
arrives at Paris And he does not go to Paris by the
direct route. 1t seems that he had bought through
ticket by a roundabout way and he must needs save
his money and travel the distance, no matter now
far
Now, what becomes Of their projected trip He
informs her that she cannot accompany him on the
train, for her and the child would be troublesome
He does not wish her Tor his guide although she had
spent years IN study 10 accomplish herself Is accom-.
went thence to Geneva. There, in, the presence OF
strangers, he is heard to curse and
damn his wife, because she stood at the
door TOO long with some OF her friends She
Is overwhelmed and terrified at his violence,
and attempted to ring the bell to call assistance.
He then left her and started on his European tour
alone: All these facts he admitted to her brother
(Mr. King) who has testified a witness in this
case He left her IN strange land without pro.
just after he had cursed her. There was then no
hope for her that he would ever love her again: she
child with him. The charge OF cruelty, we claim, is
sustained beyond question.
They say she is not resident OF Indiana. We
prove that she has been in Indiana more than year
before her petition was filed. she fed from him
VINO never provided her with home. When he
abandoned her in Geneva she came 10 Indiana.
They say she abandoned him. There is no evidence
TO support it. He asks this Court to give him the
custody OF the child, but he fails to show that ne has
made any provision for Its Keeping. lie Is
here pursuing malicious and vindlctiye de-
fence, introducing his wife letters In evil
dence, and trying to throw discred1t UPON
her character. They make some baseless charges
concerning her and Count Schuenbery; yet the wit
ness who testified to all this, Miss Nettie LawtoIl.
also herself the defendants sister, always sends her
regards to this same Count SchulenDery, whom she
had also met in Europe. All efforts TO injure her
character have failed utterly.
Both parties are here asking divorce. we claim
1t on the ground OF the defendants cruelty, which
we think we have proved. The defendant asks
divorce from his wife on the ground OF her causeess
desertion of him.
MR.. wALLAcEs ARGUMENT FOR DEFENCE
The position or the parties and the interests
involved here make this very important case. IT.
In evidence that the plaintiff came TO Indiana per-
feet stranger little over one year ago. Is she bona
tide resident Of the State IL the first question: why
did she come to Indiana Her father lives, ana has
n Waqn ify for husband