The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1876-06-19
An Extraordinary Case.

i suit which was disposed of in the
Albany courts Wednesday afternoon
brought to light strange and interesting
story, The facts of which, as related by the
father may be substantially stated as fol-
lows, as printed in the Albany journal
Two yesTa ago This month, one Henry
George, Il former well known resident of
this city, wooed and won Harriet, the am
liable daughter of Mr. William Chaplain,
one of our city missionaries. They being
united in marriage, took up their residence
in tins city, and for nearly year their
lives passed happily and smoothly enough.
A child was the fruit of the union, and in
lis possession and as she supposed the pos
session of her husbands heart, the poor
wife never dreamed of the cloud that was
to throw It's shadow over her future path
in life. Then n change came. The hus-
band professed to have scruples about liv-
ing in the marriage state, and after while
avOwed himself convert TO the principles
which govern the Shaker community in
WateIyliet. He claimed that on these
grounds separation must take place be-
tween himself and wife. His wife, who
felt the utmost affection for him, reasoned
In vain, and at length, acting under the adj
vice Of friends, consented TO separation.
and on the 1st Of April, 1875, the necessary
deed was executed for a separation from
bed and board, be paying her $3.50 and OIL
lowing her TO retain possession of one half
the furniture. and the custody of their only
child, then an infant. The separation ex-
ecuted, the wife returned to her parents,
while George affiliated himself with the
Shaker ramilv in Watervliet This state of
affairs continued until last fall, when the
injured woman was waited upon by her
husband. He professed to have changed
his views, was sorry for what he had done,
and besought her forgiveness, which was
accorded. He paid her frequent visits, and
if he then belonged to the Shakers. be vio-
lated one of its fundamental principles, by
resumiug co-habitation with his wife. He
also urged her to go with him to the COM
munitw, representing that he had hired out
to work for the community only, and that
they had leased to him house in which he
and his wife and child could live. His en-
treaties at last prevailed, and she consented
to remove to the village, and did so. She
found that no house was ready, that her
husband kept separate from her, and that
she was compelled to occupy room in
common with the sisters of the community.
There were none but members OF the Gem
munity to appeal to, and these, il we are
rightly informed, urged her to join the
family. One day, meeting her husband
and upbraiding him for his neglect and
falsily, he threw off the mask and owned
| he was as much Shaker as ever; that he
never intended to live with her, and that
he must stay with the community or go to
| the poor house. Mrs. George then COM
muncated with her father, Mr.. Chapman,
who brought he away and on her behalf
demanded the furniture she had taken
thither with her, claiming that the original
deed of separation had not been vitiated by
the resuming of cohabitation, for the reason
that it had been procured through frandu-
lent representations on the part OF George.
The latter refused to deliver, and, on being
threatened with proceedings, cody advised
Mr.. Chaplain to go on, as ne would deliver
nothing unless compelled to do so by law.
Mr. Chaplain and his daughter then through
Messrs. Greens & Dreyer, commenced an
action in replevln to recover possession of
] the furniture, which is said to be very val