The New York herald., 1877-02-07
THE COURTS.
Domestic Drama Away from
the Footlights.
SCENES FROM REAL LIFE
The Best. Gin OF Lawyers Not
Pecuniary Plenitude.
SUIT BY THE FRENCH REPUBLIC

Mrs. Eliza Suaow 10 known TO many In the theat.
rical profession In this city and elsewhere keeping
boarding house in West Thirteenth street, whero for
some years past many OF the ladies and gentlemen
gagged in the leading theatres OF tho city have been
accustomed to take refuge from the iootlighIs and
public gaze amid the more substantial and unpoctic
necessares OF life. She is English lady, and in 1885,
soon after coming to this country, Joined matrimonial
hands with Thomas r. Sudlow, Rev. Alexander 8.
Leonard performing tho marital rites, and the
sary witnesses being present She had at the time OF
her marriage ono daughter, Bessie, by former hus-
band, who has since become quito noted In the tho
atrca profession and Is reported to have recently
become welded to the Lord Mayor OF Dublin. The
result OF her marriage with Nr Sudow has becn
four other children, ranging from twenty.
one to ten years OF age. One OF these Fanny, also
on the STAGE and now performing In the city OF New
Orleans This household Of the Sudlows notwith.
standing the many tender poetic associations which
must surround It, considering the profession OF
bers OF the family and guests has not been without
farcical II not tragic phases The wife has evidently
become dissatisfied and Is unwilling to submit longer
to marital associations with her husband. To enforce
a separation she has, through her attorney, Mr. s. c.
Consbie, commenced q suit for limited divorce, the
ground OF cruel and inhuman part OF
her husband, and that II has become unsafe for her
longer TO cohabit with HIM. motion is noticed for
hearing In Supreme Court, Chambers, In which she
seeks order to compel her husband to bear the
penses incident to the erection OF judicial barrier be-
tween them. From the papers in tho case already in
s0urt 1t would appear that very degree
ai domestic felicity has existed In the Thirteenth
street household.
In her complaint she charges that the conduct Of her
husband toward her has since their marriage been
Always less or moro cruel and inhuman To specify
more particularly acts of this character she says that
1857 her husband might be regarded
haotuaI drunkard, and whom undcr tho influence of
nrnk would use violence towards both her anu her
children, knocking her down and bruisng and wound
ing her In various places and KNOCKING down her
Thomas and breaking chair IN beating him. On the
l0h oi January, 1872 lie struck and beat with his
lists. threw her down and threatened TO kill her. ON
the lst of July following no broke into her room whe
her daughter Bessie was confined there sick and
nsutcd and abused her, thereby aggravating her
daughters sickness, and when requested to leave he
struck her tho face and also struck her daughter
Fanny On the 18th Of June, 1885, no seized her and
violently struck her with his lists, KNOCKING her down
and over trunk, backenlng and injuring her
and chest. and making her lame for week Somo time
ago be brnko her arm and while II healing he in
drunken IT. violently wrenchcd and twisted It, break
ing again, thus causing her most cxcrucatiDg pain
aud making her sick and unable 10 attend TO her
duties On the 18th OF August last he seized her by
the other arm ana attempted to break that but sue
ous occasions other than those above mentioned she
says he struck ana beat her IN an innuman manner,
Of violence. He has been daily the habit OF calling
her and her daughter vio names the preseuce OF
others, and but week ago chokcd her daughter
Fanny. He has also by his conduct tended to insult
and drive away her boarders, and has injured and
almost broken up her business She is wiling by her
efforts and those Of her children,
support herself and them II her husband will
only let her alone. All she asks is that he viii
be compelled to pay the expense OF getting legally rid
Of him. She adds that he in the receipt OF $50
month In tho Custom House, but has contributed at
she and her children having been compelled 10 support
themselves for several years past Such tho burden
and that he be enjonsd from entering her house.
The defendant husband, Ia his answer put In for him
ny ME Morris 3 WISE. MS attorney, sings different
10 the year 1885, but alleges that she mad another law
ful husband living at the time of such marriage. Hc
denies all the allegations of cruelty made against him
by her, and charges in opposition that she has
rious times within the past ten years assaulted him
whilo she under the influence Of liquor and beer
About April !, 1873, she assaulted him and broke
stoneware pitchers on his skull She OF quarrclsome
disposition but that for the sake OF his
children he has endeayored TO Two with her neaoeatv
and tremendously, During the past three years she
has refused to cohab with MIN and has salts
factory reason therefor. But ne Is still willing to live
pcaceably with her for the sake OF their children and
TO provide Tor her to the best of his ability He denies
OF his children and insists that he has
exercised only the proper authority OF father to tram
wife has nci,ed his daughter Fanny TO disooey him
and when the latter has abused him and spit In his
face he admits he had reminded her OF her duty to her
parent Unhappily he has been unfortunate in bust.
ness but he has always been and willing
sist her to the bcst of his ability. He concludes by
asking that the decree OF separation demanded her
complaint be denied her and that her complaint be dis
missed.
The daughter Fanny, alluded to in the complaint and
answer makes affidavit which tends to substantatc
The story OF her mother. She also asserts that her
ahcr struck her brother while the latter protect
ing her that ne has threatened TO kill her mother;
that she cndcavOrcd to prevent him the occasion
when her mother says he attempted to enter 3ossles
sick room, and tnat he then told her 10 hell She
returned after months abseuce and salutcd him
kindly but Kindness she return was an
invitation 20 to the hot place. On tho 5lh
October last nc went INTO the dining pulled
the iablecoih of the table, smashing the dishes and
,rcatened to cut the throats OF all OF them.
The papers In the do not disclose who tho first
husband was. TO whom the defendant refers in his
complaint. But tho rumor among those nmilIar with
the parties Is that the defendant claims that when
married tho plaintiff she had previously been tho wife
but for week OF sea captain, who had gone to sea
and been heard OF again. This mysterious hus-
band the defendant thinks living at the time Of
his (defcndans) marriage II not still sailing tho ''salt
over" while II rs assorted on behalf OF the wife
that thcre was any valid marriage with the cap
tain at all. and II there had been ho dead in
law " not fact before the present marriage Argu-
ment on the motion will be heard within a day or two
the and result OF the litigation will no doubt
excite considerable interest In theatrical circles wcrc
all the parties we'll known.
~ LAWYERS HARD UP.