The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-05-12

made by Mrs. koecker against the Doctor were
those of infdelty to his marriage vow; that he
was of immoral habits, having his study adorned
with improper pictures and statuettes; and that he
brought women to the house and kept them
there for an unlawful purpose. All which
caused the greatest astonishment and sorrow
among the friends of the family, who had
always supposed the Doctor to be q pure man,
and who during twenty years of his married
life had never heard disparaging word spoken
against his character. In answer to this the
Doctor emphatically denied all the charges, and
so the pleadings were completed.
The suit is for divorce from bed and board,
and during the past year the parties have been
before an examiner upon a claim for alimony
pendente lite. The proceedings before the ex-
aminer were of an exciting nature occasionally,
the lawyers becoming considerably heated In
their work, and scattering uncomplimentary
epithets dd lib. at the young lady, who was
specially arraigned as perticepS crinpinis with
the Doctor.
Both parties seem anxious for trial, and the
matter came to-day before the court upon a
writ of habeas corpus dd teSt[icdndtnl, issued
at the instance of the libellant against the res
pondent, commanding him to produce in court
for the purpose of testifying, his two daughters
whom he had placed in school at Boston. He
resists the writ upon the ground that he cannot
with justice be compelled to bring in his own
children for the purpose of testifying against
him to blacken his and their name. To-day
was fixed for the argument of this point.
Constant Guilou, Theo. Cuyler, and w. J.
mCElTOy ALJOrnoY NIenoral
f. Carroll Brewster, George Northrop, and Hon.
w. L. Hirst for respondent.
The Judge calling up the case, Mr.. McElroy,
for the libellant stated that the respondent had
made return to the writ of habeas corpus, say
ing in substance that the two children had
always been where their testimony might be
taken by deposition. This return Mr.. McElroy
proposed to traverse by the officer who served
the writ upon the respondent and who would
tell what answer the respondent made at the
time.
Mr.. Brewster objected to any verbal traverse
of written return, and his Honor directed the
traverse to be put into writing aud filed, which
Mr.. McElroy proceeded to do.
Mr.. Brewster said this proceeding was exceed
ingly novel. Said he:-"We are here this morn
ing to try an issue directed by the Court, issued
against the respondent and replied to by him.
Now the other side attempted to foist a new
matter into the case by going into evidence upon
the hdbedS corpus. This / do not understand.
If the writ is one for the restoration of children
to the mother, your Honor would not hear it
now; if it is writ dd testiicandun1, 1 never
heard of such being directed to any other per-
son than jailer; and the case cannot be con-
tinued upon any traverse. Therefore 1 ask that
unless the other side want this divorce case to
be continued, jury be at once called. If they
wish continuance, let them make their appli-
cation, and we will answer it,"
No answer was made to this suggestion, and
his Honor directed a jury to be called.
Mr.. Cuyler-Before the court makes that
OIucT, nave WOIu W pdy. we are utT6 To
try this cause. A necessary preliminary to
trial is the production of witnesses. writ
was directed against the respondent, command
ing him to bring in the two witnesses who are
under his control, and he makes return that
they are not in his CONTROL which return we
wish to traverse, and then your Honor will see
what truth there is in it.
Mr.. Brewster-I insist upon our right to try
the issue which Is upon your Honor's list, and
not the issue upon this writ. After the libellant
commenced proceedings for divorce, these
children were sent to school in Boston with her
knowledge, and she could then have taken their
testimony as going witnesses.
The Judge said he deemed it proper to have
the writ first disposed Of and therefore allowed
the traverse to be made.
Mrs. Koecker here came into court and made
oath to the traverse.
+. G. Sellers, crier of the District Court, was
sworn, and testified that on the afternoon of
Monday, the 10th inst, he served this writ upon
the respondent, who SAID the children were in
Boston, and whoever got them would have q
happy time of 1t.
Mr.. McElroy said he and Mr.. Cuyler had
written to the Superior of the school at which
the children were, and at the same time sent a
telegram from Mrs. Koecker, requesting that
the children be ready to start here on last Mon
day. In answer to this he had received a des-
patch from the Superior, saying that she had
been prohibited by DR.. Koecker to allow the
children to come, which he wished to read in
evidence.
Mr.. Brewster and Mr.. Northrop objected To
this ON the ground that the communications be-
tween the Superior and Mrs. Koecker could not
be evidence against DR.. Koecker.
Mr.. Cuyler said that as the Superior was the
agent of the respondent for the custody of the
| children, her answer to the demand for theil
! production would be evidence in this investiga
| tion.
Judge Paxson-'The true question before the
| Court is this:-Dr. Koecker has been ordered tc
produce these children in court and has failed
to do so; has he sufficiently explained his failure
to obey or not? l will allow the telegram to bt
| read"
The telegram was read and stated that tn,
| dispatches had been received by the Superior
| from DR.. Koecker forbidding her to allow tn,
children to come to this city, and therefore sht
| had to refuse to send them. A letter received
| this morning by Mrs. Koecker from one of tn,
| daughters was also handed to the Judge anC
| read privately by him.
At the instance of his Honor, Mr.. Cuyler pro
ceeded TO define his position. He said he wa
exceedingly anxious to try this cause, and wa
unwilling to allow anything but that which wa
| of the most absolute Importance to the issue Il
work continuance. The testimony of thes
children was most material, and the caus
| should not go on without their presence. There
fore, he asked that jury be now sworn and tn
cause postponed until they would have time t.
travel from Boston to this city.
After much discussion by counsel upon thi
motion for a postponement his Honor over
ruled 1t and directed a jury to be called.
Counterfeit Sauce.
Court Of Quarter SessiOns-AHison, p j.
A. A. Smythe pleaded guilty this morning
q charge of selling counterfeit Worcester sauc
of the brand of Lea IL Perrin. The prosecutor
stated to the Court that this proceeding wa
instituted simply for the purpose of protectin
the proprietors of the sauce, and setting an e1
ample to other wonld-be counterfeiters, and nc
with a view to bring upon the defendant
heavy punishment, and therefore they asked th