, 1873-04-01
THE BLAKE CASE.

RI MnintcnnMco nnd $500. for Legal
Services. j. -'''' 80
On tho Dlako caso being called up, yesterday
morning, on tho ohancory sido Of tho Superior
Court, before Judge Gary, lila Honor referred to
the authoritios oitcd on Saturday. nfr. 'Horvoy
callod ls Honor'e attention to tho fact TINT tho
now edition spoken Of on Saturday would not DO
ready Till noxt month, and his Honor said he ex-
pootod lis decision on tho point now raisod
would bo given in timo to bo included in tho now
edition, and tho counsel said perhaps tho edition
which little bit Of legal toviality at
tho cxponeo Of tho tll1atory odi-
tton, tho Court finished his consideration
Of tho authoritios and slowly doliyorod himsof
OF his ideas on tho matters submitted.
His Honor said that tho question Of tho turis-
diction Of this Court was already eottlol and
thoro was nothing to be said about that. Tho aot
that had given tho jurisdiction provided that the
Court should mako nh order wllero necessary for
money for tho prosecution Of tho suit. Thoro-
fore, II would not bo at ali necessary for him to
rotor to tho question Of juriBdiotion, since he
Ind no doubt Whatever on tho point. What had
to DO decided was tho question aa to tho meaning
Of tho language used respecting what money
Was necessary to tho prosecution Of tho suit :;
forinatance, was 1t necessary that tho p1aintin
should live in order to prosecute !? and did the
term "monoy necessary to prosecute " Include
money to live, lifo boing necessary in order to
prosecute.
Mr.. Horyoy thought tho torns woro Bynono-
NOUS.
. Tho Court eaid not necessarily 80. Tho COM
paiuant munt live. If she intenled to proa-
ccuto. she must live, aud ii the law contemplate
cd giving her tho means to prosecute, it was
difficult to 300 how Bhe could do so without ehe
nd MI fT1n fn n1iJn 1I1Rf IL nm
how the matter presented itsolf to him, 30 fur as
he had considered 1t. =
hr. Horyey-She can live without alimony.
The Court-Dut sho cannot live without all
n1r: Horvoy-Ycs, but SHE could got her al
iment by earning it. This waB practically an ap-
plication for alimony. She (N1rs. Bleke) applied
to tllo Court for moneys for special purpoHe.
ant proved to bo in the wrong but whoro ho lad
not been proved to hnvo committed wrong it
did aeom unreasonable to conBtrle tho statute
to mean TINT he must pay. Tho act OF 1867 gayc
complainant for the prosecution Of tho suit. It
gavo tho Court Jurisdiction to allow her moneys
for tho purpose OF liying,--as l,o read tit it
could be shown that sho was living apart from
her husband, through no fault Of her own, and
il her husband could bc proved to poasoss ample
moanB. uo understood that to mean that she
was not to bn compelled to prosecute hor suit
out Of hor own earning, after she had succeeded
III showing that tue defendant waa gully Of ex-
polling her, or whatoyor tho Court should con-
aidor good causo. If tho act did not mean this;
IT tho meaning was not believed to be go clearly
expressed that 1t WAS not necessary to rlko any
other words. how easy it wej,ld have been to
Wet was tho @ graumatcai su a to BE-
placed Oh tho plraao3 l. was not to giyo her
moneys to live, but 10 give ller money
to prosecute, and, while the suit is
n progress, tie husband shall pay tho costs;
the dofondant could bo nado to pay for tho
maintenance Of tho complainant, tho courts,
already ovorcrowded with litgants, would be-
como overwhelmed with snits for separate main
cnscs. DO found too anxious to proceed. 1t
onco for lady to marry. and, on tho first
faprise |says her hnsh1na a1d BY
port, obtain q maintenance until she thought
proper to prosecute the suit. It would become
an intolerab}o evil that no court should encour
ago. Tho oouncol represented tho case from
lengthened argument BY praying tho Court to be-
careful in construction TINT might open tho
door to great deal Of fraud and trouble.
Tho Court said ho must consider the intent of
suits must include the means Of living. He re-
viewed tho casoa cited on Saturday, aud they
his opinion the English Cham
color holding that it would DO time to give an
OIQef 70 Lub WHO Wucn 8Ae pFGHontc4 herself At
the house Of her husband, and ho expelled hor.
II payment depended upon expulsion, it aeelned
that at any timo tho pay could DO stoppe Il by tho
husband ooasing tho oexpulsion. Tho powers aud
privileges OF married women had boon worry much
changed and increased; their earnings
arc their own, and it had beoomo quito
n serious question, although ono not
necessary to be decided there, how fur their in
creased rights might affect this question of di-
Torce. It Ind not been tho theory Of the law
that the man having abundant mcanB to support
his wife should compel hor to manual labor in
order to prosecute suit agninbt him for divorce.
It would DO no answer, III suoll suit, to say
that tho woman WAS m ab1e-bolied woman, and
that she must earn her living. His Honor re-
forred at considerable length to tho argument
Of tho counsel. simply onlarging in detail on
tho Wow Of his remarks at tho start
foreshadowod, concluding by stating that at the
proacnt Htate Of the proceedings, when tho only
evidence produced was that the marriage oo-
currod+ and that expulsion OF the wife from
homo llad followed, and unarnuch Us sho is with
out moana Of support, ho must grant her
monthly allowance upon which to 1.-Two, which ho
would place at tho minimum, and q special al-
lowanco for legal expenses.
Tho question Of how much it would ho wel to
allow for monthly expenses Was lightly dis
cuased, tho defendant stuting that "Hle lived on
826 a month last winter" aud His Honor finally
fl1od tho amount at $50. that amount to bo paid
immediately, and aimilar amount on the first
Of every Hub9bqucnt month. For legal EXPENSES,
5000 was allowed, tho Judge stating that il cir
rnmatnreea rao,fsrai n lin ANN, r,,,,1