Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1874-05-26
BRINKLEY DIVORCE CASE.
A Most Interesting Legal Question
for the Har.


The New York journals are full OF the
celebrated Brinkley divorce case, which
bids fair to become noted as celebrated
trial in legal annals. The New York
Sun of Wednesday. goth, and Thursday,
2lst, has the following:
The case of Mrs. Elizabeth Brinkleyp
vino is suing her husband for divorce
mensa ct thoro and for alimony, was
yesterday resumed before Judge Van
Brunt and jury. The defendant,
Hugh Lawson Brinkley, is the rever-
sonary legatee of an estate worth 81 s5O0,-
900, the property being principally near
Memphis, Tennessee, but is dependent
upon his father, during the latter life
time, for an allowance from the estate.
The plaintiff is the orphan daughter OF
James s. Charles, an actor and theatre
cal manager, who prosecuted his BUSH
ness last in Memphis, and who, at his
death, left his daughter under the charge
of the Masonic fraternity. The Masons
adopted and educated her.
The plaintiff having rested at the
close on Monday, General w. ii. An
thon, defendants counsel, opened for
the defendant. He said that the main
question was whether marriage con-
tract existed between the plaintiff and
defendant. The defendant proposed to-
prove that the relations between them
were not matrimonial. Among their
immediate friends they were well known
to be man and mistress, and not husband
and wife. Counsel also proposed to
,..o,,o .hoA tho xlo.nttR Lo1 ,,Jaratond
the matter perfectly, and had not re-
garded herself as a married woman,
evincing the sense of her freedom from
marital bonds by contracting an engage
ment of marriage at st. Paul, Minn.,
while she was at one time disporting
herself to be rich Southern widow, and
acquired the scubriquet of the "dia-
mond widow" by wearing the gems given
her by the defendant.
Clarence B. Hunt, the first witness,
testified that he had long known both
parties. 1t was through him they were
introduced. Plaintiffs reputation was
not unsullied
A note from the plaintiff to witness,
written on the eve of his departure for
Memphis, was read. 1t was an appeal
to him, on the score of friendship, to
refrain from mentioning the relationship
which subsisted at that time, February,
1865, between the writer and the defend
ast, and was signed Lizzie L !" the
initial standing for Lawson, the feigned
name under which the plaintiff and de-
PENDANT were living together in New
York at that time.
When Mr.. Hunt left the stand General
Anthem, in loud tone, called Hugh l..
Brinkley, who was sitting at his side.
The defendant stepped up briskly. He
has obviated the difficulty about his at
tendance on the first days of the trial,
growing out OF disobeyed order for the
payment of $1,000 as fee to Mrs. Brink
ley's attorneys,by payment of the money.
His examination in chief, so far as it
progressed, resulted in denial in gene
raj and in detail OF all the material testi-
moDy of the plaintiff.
The Brinkley divorce suit, continued
yesterday before Judge Van Brunt and
jury, attracted an extraordinary
amount Of attention. Besides the
crowds who wish to attend the trial on
account of its romantic features the
legal fraternity take great interestin the
case as one which must settle many
troublesome questions touching nom
ceremonial marriages and the laws
affecting marriages generally. At least
fifty prominent members of the bar lis
tened eagerly to yesterday s proceedings.
The continuation of the examination
in. chief of the defendant, Hugh L..
Brinkley, lasted until after the recess.
He denies generally and specifically all
the material testimony of the plaintiff.
and fatty contradicts DIR. Mott Mr..
Moller, and half dozen Memphis wit
nesses, asserting that he never thought
of the plaintiff as his wife, and never in
any form or at any time acknowledged
her TO be such.
At late hour Mr.. Beach commenced
a cross examination of the most search
ing character. Under it the defendant
frequently got confused as to dates and
events, and occasionally eontradicted