The New York herald., 1877-01-10
THE COURTS.
Commitment Of Migrants as Dis
orderly Persons.
THE HEART BOWED DOWN.
The True Inwardness Of the Emma
Mine Bubble.
JUSTICE STORM-BLOCKADED.

Harriet NJ Kcegap who IL q music teacher, was
married to Daniel Z. Keegan in Brooklyn on Juno 10
1850 Kecgan being widowcr and having large lam
lily OF children differences speedily arose between pe
newly married couple growing out OF the WHO a''eseu
ni-treatmcnt by. tho step children, some OF ~hom
nearly OF age. The trouble finally cuimnsteo ~
separation between the husband and wife somo three
months after the wedding Shortly alter the WHO nao
her husband arrested In Brooklyn on charge OF apah
donmcnt and aiterward brought suit Tor oiVorcc
y mensa against him, alleging cruel una innuhah
treatment on his part, which action Is SUI penu'
ing An order OF slmony made allowing
tho wifo $1,000 per snnum pending the suit
This sum the husband paid until 1851, from
which period tho wiie has received hothns
In September 1874 the vito made application hroush
the Com mssoncrs OF Public CHARITIES aud Correclop
for tho of her husband as disordery Pcrson
under the laws OF 1861 upon which he was afies.eo
and taken before police magistrate, who upon eA.
aminatlun adludccd him gully and ordered that lie
give bonds 10 pay his wiie $40 per week or oe com
united 70 PRISON From TINS order appeal "as mrM
the Court OF Special SESSIONS, which ahrm.u
The CONVICTION, but reduced the allowance. heesah
counsel, Mr.. Douglas a. Levien, Jr, tlereupon sueo
out q common law certiorari 10 the supreme Cour.
and, upon this writ. argument was had yesterday!
before the General Term OF the Court IL was c'aiheu
by Keegun's counsel, among other things that inc
statute ID relation 10 writs oi ceitorar od not appy
This case that the conviction was illegal, as lhe eV
dcnco disclosed the act that tho divorce sun
by the complainant was pending ana unuctefM'heus
ana that, therefore, there coud be no ABANDONMENT,
the law enforcing separation between the parties us
condition pre cedent 10 successful inanienahce oi
the action. 1t was also contcnded that II was no
Uence Tor 10 fail TO support his Iatpy uh'ess
such failure or neglect wllu as othcrwSe party
VITO through the visitation OF b0d or through stasha
ton III busuess was unable to DO or procure wcIk ~
obtain means support his family, might DC auJudgea
criminal IL was iurther argued ut some ienSth that
the act OF 1860 unconstitutional pursuant 10 ar
lice T. section H. OF the constitution proVuihg 'hat
no private local bill shall embrace more tnan one
subject, and that such subject shall be expressed
its ine the act in question Ueins entitled An act IN
relation to police courts III the city oil New orK
and embracing dozen different subjects. Mr H. Il
Noah, the Assistant Corporation Attorney, IN opposi-
tlvn that the supreme Court had no power
the adjudication oi tho Court oi special scs
SONS that It's decision na, and that ifany review
could be ad must be before General Sessions ON
statutory WRIT which must be sued out IN len Gays
after conv ction. He also argued that the CONVICTION
was regular and warranted by the evidence
Inc Court took tho papers ior consideration Ihe
special Importance, as the disposition oi
largo number OF similar pending the result