The Portland daily press., 1871-02-13

thus prOeoklng, thus contributing nurnose1,
10 make her husband a drunkard bv her o,v1
mlsconduet, bringing upon herself personal
4 violence, should take advantage of that d,nn,
enness and that violence to seek and ob.o;r
| divorce. 1t would be question for Won to 40
termine, and probably there would be but one
answer of every rational mind in such case.
| So if you find the wife has so conducted ber-
self that she has not been a chaste wife. that
she has been in the habit of violating her mar.
riage VOWS and marriage bed, and in conse-
queuce OF that the husband, to drown his
| trouble, has become drunkard aud under the
sting of jealousy and feelings of indignation at
her conduct he treated her violently, you might
| well hesitate, any jury might we'll hesitate and
doubt, whether it would be reasonable and
| proper that divorce under such circumstances
| should be granted. 1t, therefore, comes back
to the precise question which first presented
you The first question is, are both or one at
least of the charges on which the plaintiff
claims divorce proven?
1t so, in view of all the evidence, is it
| reasonable and proper she should have d.
vorce, and that the latter question, is addressed
10 your largest discretion. There are but two
LIMITATIONS upon it, If you find both parties
nave been guilty Of adultery the law declares
!has divorce shall not be granted; or if there
IS colluson between them, that is corrupt
| agree ent to seek divorce you cannot find
IN favor of it. There is no pretence of anv
coliuslon here. need not, therefore, ENLARGE
upon tnat branch OF the case. When both
| parties nave been guilty of adultery, or there
| Is colusion between them TO procure a divorce
divorce shall not be granted Such is the
mandate of the law. With these two excep-
| tons, if the jury e nd one or more of the snh
stantal allegations in the libel proven, it Is
| within their sound judgment and discretion
| whether or not defence shall be granted in
the case being tried. II there was COLLISION
between these parties, of which there is no
| pretence, or if both of them have been guilty
of adultery, the statute says, in so many words,
| that divorce shall not be decreed. With these
| two exceptions there is no limitation upon the
| discretion OF the jury when the case is being
| tried to the jury, except that they must find
one or more OF the grounds stated in the libel
true as foundation of their verdict in favor of
| a divorce.
| Now, gentlemen, I have one word more to
say to you and then shall close It is rule
lying at the foundation of all trials that every
party is presumed to be innocent until tue
contrary is proved. 1t is humane, reasonable
and just rule of law and it is one which we
should never lose sight of, and it is applicable
to one party in this case as much as the other.
The defendant is presumed to he sober man
unless the contrary is proved and you should
require satisfactory proof of that fact before
you find it to be fact. He is presumed to
have treated his wife kindly and affectionately.
as it is the duty OF every husband to treat his
wife, unless the contrary is proved. You
should start with that presumption in yonr
minds in bis favor, and you should find it, I'M
less the evidence that he treated her cruelty
libel fully satisfies you of the truth of the
charge. That presumption OF innocence APP
plies to him and it applies to his wife. And
you will Judge for yourselves as candid, think
ing men whether there is not a long stride be-
tween such acts as have been testified to by
the witnesses, on the part of this woman, and
the crime OF adultery. You are to start with
tue presumption that she has been a chaste as
we'll as kind and affectionate wife and mother
Start with that presumption unless the con-
trary is satisfactorily proved; start with that
presumption, that reasonable Interpretation
upon her conduct, look at her rank and station
in life, the fact of her age, the fact that sae il
mother of children, also have in view the rank
and station in life of the one with whom it is
stated she committed the act his character and
circumstances. Starting with that presumption
in favor of all these parties of innocence unless
the contrary is proved, 1 ask you to consider
stride between the familiarities as far as all
that has been testified to as true and alb
solute lnfdelity on the part of such a one,
such woman and such a mother.
Inc verdict OF the world at large in judging
between man and a woman in cases of this
kind, say what we will, does not fall so heavily
| upon the man as upon the woman. In many
countries, and in many, of the highest civiliza-
ton, it is only the married party that is con-
| sidered guilty of adultery; and in many codes
of law, there is distinction between the guilt
| of the man and the guilt of the woman. The
woman is considered much the most culpabie
of the two when there has been illicit inter-
| course between them, because it renders the
| paternity Of her offspring doubtful, and be-
cause the idea that woman, a wife and a
mother Of children should prostitute herself to
crafty the passions of man other than her
husband seems to lower her so much more in
the estimation OF every cue than it does the
man.
In weighing the circumstances which have
| been testified to in this case weigh them care
| fully In view of the presumption of innocence,
n r.oY,lr and fakfn e. 1c
parties, and then determine whether the re-
oriminatory charge of adultery made by the
defendant against his wife is satisfactorily
proven. II it is and you are satisfied that the
| defendant himself has also been guilty of
| adultery you can not grant divorce, or rather
| you cannot find verdict that divorce ought
| to be granted; it is the court that makes the
decree and not the jury.
do not know gentlemen, that can add any
thing to what have already said, that will
aid you in the just determination of this cause.
You have listened long and patiently to the
| evidence. You have had the advantage of
arguments of unusual length by counsel of
ability and learning selected by tie party and
urged upon you their several views. You will
| Judge between them, you will weigh the evil
dence and consider the arguments so far as you
tank they are sound, give to them all that
consideration which their merit deserves and
then you return to the two great questions, is
one or both of the charges made by the wife
against thus man, this husband, true, proven to
your satisfaction. Start with the presump-
| ton that he Is an Innocent man, that he is
not guilty of either charge until the contrary
| IS proved; then come to the conduct of the
wife, consider the charges which the husband
mas made against her., start with the pre-
| sumption of innocence and in view of all the
| circumstances, find whether the charges are
| satisfactorily proven. And when you have de-
termined what the facts are, bring to bear up
| on the proposition whether divorce ought to
be granted your best iudgment,apd ifyou think
M al q of tbo =
reasonable and proper, that it will be con-
ductlve to domestic harmony and consistent
with the peace and morality of society, then
| say so, otherwise not.
THE VERDICT.
| Judge Walton finished his charge to the jury
at 1903 o'clock, and they retired to decide up
on their verdict. We understand that when
they reached the jury-room they did not take
a ballot as they found that they were all
agreed. At 3.O7 P. NJ. they returned to the
Court Room, it being the hour for the re-
assembling Of Court, the corridors of City
Building and the steps and sidewalks in
front being filed with an excited crowd of
people waiting for the verdict all the seats
IN the Court Room were filled with people
including many ladies, while the crowd were
restrained from the entrance by locking the
front door. The jury were composed as fol-
lows: j. S. Mcdonald, of Westbrook. fore.
man; G. w. Chute, Windham;W. G. Brew
er, Freeport; B. F. Colby, Gray; G. L. Dres-
ser, Standish; V. R. Fuller, Cape Elizabeth
Enos Leighton, Cumberland; Arthur Milliken,
Westbrook John W. Russell, Portland; VIM.
Spencer, Jr., Baldwin; Ellery H. Starbird,
Falmouth, and Samuel True, Yarmouth.
The defendant and his counsel were present,
but only the counsel for lihellant. The usual
formula passed between the Clerk of the
Court and Foreman of the jury, and the Clerk
| read the following verdict: '"The Jury find
that the defendant is guilty in manner and
form as the plaintiff has in her libel alleged
against him, and that divorce ought to be
| granted as prayed for in said libel.'
The news few like wild fire, and there was
general expression of satisfaction at the
verdict. The counsel for defendant has filed
exceptions and the case goes to the Law
| Court.