The New York herald., 1871-09-10
SUPERIOR COURT T-SpsClAL TERM.
Important Decision with Regard 10 the
Duties Of Referees.
Before Judge Mct unD.

Important Decision with Regard 10 the
Dnties Of Referees.
Before Judge Mcuunn.
Joseph r. he'TR us. Florence A. MerriU.-Judge
McCunn In rendering decision In this case said
This case comes before the Court for final judg
ment on the report Of u referee. rho action is for
an absolute divorce. Tne cause was referred, and
report such testimony TO this tribunal for
final Judgment Here the duties OF the
referee ended. There Is no power IN the order
OF reference enabling hiiutO grant Judgment or find
conclusions OF law or write an opinion; his doing so
Is therefore superfuous The powers OF q referee
Oroer appointing such reieree. Ii he IS appointed
to take testimony, tnat done his duties end Ii the
order appointing him declares he snail take tesll
mony and report such testimony to this
Court together with his opinion thereon.
then he should conline himself simply to such duty
and then stop. If the order calls for mis- Judgment,
this he shO- Id comply with; but in all cases be Is
specifically confined to the terms OF the order ap.
pointing him. and this for the best OF reasons :
that ne Is the mers creature of the Court and
should strictly obey its behess ana NJ
more. 1t seems that the plainnn, who looks
TO DC lad from eighteen To twenty years,
first met the defendant IN railroad car,
that through her Establishments she captivated hlni
at once, and Without further delay ceremony they
were married. Thc defendant some eight or zen
days after marriage LETT her husbands nome, and
went TO house OF prostitution kept in Thireentn
street by one Clifford and lived there against his
VIII Tor some time as one OF its inmates. She had
lived there before ner marriage to plaintiff aud un-
known 10 hlnl Merrill the plaint1, rs The evidence
SHOWS, tried TO get her away nom this nouse, and
was found once or twice III her company. AS
have said before, all the evidence in The case,
both sides, establishes positively the fact that this
woman. the defendant, Is now, had been be-
fore marriage, living openly ana wantony IN one OF
these houses OF PROSTITUTION, plying her nntortl-
nate business. Counsel Tor the woman urge
tlat because the plaintiff went there 10 see
the defendant mat he was accomphce In
her crime. There the slightest portion OF the
proof that can he relied on TO warrant such con.
cuslon. Plaintiff says chat lie went there once or
twice, out he alleges that IL was TO get his wife
away from sucn surroundings and from the whole
tenor OF The evidence IT must be concluded that TINS
was clearly his object. Finding, as he alleges all
his efforts inenectual he Drought tins action.
The rule OF law Is well settled that
wDen a par,y frequents houses or prostl-
tuition ib Is presumed they go there Tor the
purpose OF prostitution themselves. The testimony
on Dolh sides shows and it Is even admitted, that
she Is now living openly IN one OF those houses, and
the proof On the part oi the paIntn establishes che
TACT that she has been soliciting men accom-.
pany her 10 such houses OF shame Indeed The
proof Tor the defendant hersen SHOWS she
IS prostitute. The plaiutln is OF a respectable
family, occupying a responsible position IL n most
extensive business firm III this city and IL well
thought of by MS employers, and with the eXccp-
tlon OF this misfortune bears an irrepioachaDie
character. Under these cfrcums and IRON the
proof in the case Judgment OF divorce must be
ordered III favor OF piainiliI.