Litchfield enquirer., 1875-10-28

side with some of the old families of the town, and at her death left alarge number of relatives to mourn her departure. Amiable in disposition. and ever ready to do good to others. she was known only to be esteemed and beloved. In the social circle her memory will be cherished as a thing not soon to be forgotten. Her ex- ample, as a consistent, earnest. and devot- ed Christian. will long be remembered. Of her it may truly be said, ''She, being dead, yet speaketh." =
 Company H turned out for rife prac- tice on Thursday of last week. Only twenty officers and men took part, shoot ing on the ground heretofore used near the west .burying ground. Ten rounds each were fired. without rest, 200 and SOO yards distance, at target feet by 6. A hit in the bulls eye (s ;nchJ counted 5; Center circle (26 inch), 4; Inner (46 inch) 8; Outer, 2, Charles E. Peck made the best score: inner and cutters, at 200 yards; 1 center, 3 cutters and l miss at 300 yards. Total, q. Wallace D. Fisher came next, with bulls eye, 3 timers and miss at 200 yards; 2 inners and 3 misses at 300 yards. Total, 20. Messrs. c. w.. Hinsdaie. W. F. Webster, and 0. B. Smith each scored 15. E. B. Peck won the Arnica on a score of 10 goose eggs. The ammunition proved very defective. Out of 200 cartridges used 16 shells 'spllt'' and 10 balls stumbled, !" falling short of the target.
 The Superior Court closed it's Sep tember term on Friday last. Two cases brought by Sheldon Whittlesey against Rollin Curtis, one to recover balance of account. and another under the statute making defendant who withholds prop erty from attachment liable in case for fraud, were tried and decided. MT. Whit tlesey got judgment for Sl, ,445.98 debt, but Curtiss was decided not guilty of the alleged fraud, and had judgment for costs in the second case. Another case brought by Whittlesey against Mir. George Dudley, of Winsted, for taking timber and bark from land leased by Whittlesey to Cur tiss was tried but not decided Graves and Andrews for Whittlesey, Seymour for Curtiss and Dudley. In the Plymouth case of Horace s. Fowler against wm. Beckley for balance claimed due for dig ging a well, the plaintiff recovered S4S. 95; Fenn for plaintiff. Seymour for defendant. On Friday a rather interesting colored case came up from Woodbury. Eliza Jackson sought divorce from her husband Henry, and ''ctoud of witnesses" (as Mir. Graves poetically described them), was present. The accusation was intem- perance and cruel treatment. The evil dence seemed to prove that both parties got drunk and pounded each other to the extent of their ability. and the court de- clined to interfere.
 By far the most important case of the term has been that of Atwood vs. Atwood. 4hC P0AsACo 0AC AAtANCo 100 AG040C1AS O4 Woodbury in which the defendant has long been practicing physician. and they were married about twenty-seven years age. He is now worth from S6O.0O0 to s7O, ,0Oc. and Mrs. Atwood has also been recently left handsome fortune by her father. She sued for divorce on the ground of intolerable cruelty and general misconduct. She and her two daughters, young ladies of preposessing appear. ance, all testified to several instances of actual violence. to shocking indecency of conduct and language. and miserly and peuurious habits. on his part. His sup plies to the family were ridiculously small, amounting practically to an absolute fail ure to maintain them. He contrived to live on porridge and boiled potatoes and the refuse from the family table. Anum- Der of instances were given of his penuri- ous ways. such as buying five cents worth of thirty-five cent tea, refusing to have but one fire in the house and but one stick at time on that, refusing to take but half pint of milk day, and confin- ing his girls to calico dresses and coarse shoes. His language was habitually pro- fame, obscene and disgusting O the last degree. It appeared that in effect he threw the entire support of the family up on the wife while accommodating large estate from his own capital and earnings. In reply the doctor denied some of the acts of violence and admitted others, but claimed that they were committed long since. under extreme provocation. He claimed that the support of his wife was assumed by his father-in-law by express agreement. He denied much of the tes- timouy charging him with indecent lan- guage, and especially denied having been guilty of habitual profane swearing since his conversion during the Potter revival some six years since. He claimed that his indecencies of conduct were occasion ed by chronic infrmity of long standing. He attributed recent family difficulties to his daughters. He wanted them to work for their own maintenance, which they were unwilling to do. The defend ants testimony was throughout of that extremely adroit kind which bears all the appearance of remarkable candor. The case was ably presented by Messrs. Hunt ington and Cothren. the former of whom commented on the conduct of the de- fendant with great severity. MT. Sey- imour managed the defense with his usual skill and made 6 remarkably powerful ar- gument in behalf of the delinquent doc tor. The judge reserved decision till Fri day, when he granted the petitioner di- vorce and $l0.OO0 alimony.
 The following divorces have been grant cd during the term:
 ~ Charlea w frorn KaAv n Kaalar