The New York herald., 1877-11-02
DIVORCE IN HIGH LIFE.

THE M'cARTHy DIVORCE sUIT-THE YOUNG
wrFE's STORY or HER wRoEGs-A BRILL
IANT MARRIAGE BROUGHT TO 4 SPEEDY AND
PAINFUL TERMINATION.
Amid tho recent unprecedented and marvellous out
cropping OF divorce suits there Is none, according 70
the papers far submitted tho Court, In respect
TO the high social status OF tgants, the startling
details laid bare In the complaint and the peculiar and
complicated surroundings spvsiopng the case, which
takes precedence Of the suit brought by Robecca W.
Mccarthy against David X. Mccarthy. The suit is for
separation maintenance and the reason assigned
tor thus invoking the intercossion OF tho Courts 's
alleged cruelty the part Of defendant, supple
mented by desertion.
CONTRASTING PARTIEs
The plaintiff, whose maidon namo was Rebecca W.
Gilbert Is the daughter Of Albert Gilbert, the well
known Custom House Appraiser The defendant Is .
Of Dennis Mccarthy, the we'll known ex-State
Senator from Syracuse and candidate for reelection
and of the firm Of d. Mccarthy, Sons Co., ono of
the largest business firms In Syracuse The parties
married tho 9th OF January last. and, moving
they did in the highest social Circles tho wedding
a grand affair, being followed, as Is tho modern
custom occasions OF this character circles OF the
wealthy ciasses by valuable presents to the young
bride, she being yet in her teens, although he had
reached the meridian OF lie According TO her story
they occupied sumptuous dwelling IN Syracuse, fitted
up with every appliance that wealth, high culture, re-
nnement aud taste Tor luxury could suggest
THE BRIDES BRILLIANT PROSPECTS.
In ner compliant me plaintiff states taat before 's
their marriage Mt Mccarthy represented 10 her that
his interest IN the Arm OF D. Mccarthy, Sons 20.
was $3.50, 900; that he had outside the business IN
able. and that his income them was SIS 900 Size al.
leges further that he offered before their marriage
settle upon her $50 0OO that such settlement was de-
ierred unth alter their marriage. and finally that IL
was never made. Only passing ausion, however,
is to this matter so that the possibility Is that
her inducemcnt for marrying the defendant was not
wholly u mercenary one
BEGINNING TROUBLES.
Following the thread 0i her narrative and stripping
il OF onted legal verbiage her marital troubles
seemed to have commenced on the 4th OF July last,
the husband evidently this day having his
determination to snow his independence Of spirit She
says that this day and Tor tho three successive
days he treated her with great cruelty, such cruelty
consisting OF beating her shaking her anu biting her.
These cruelties, she adds, repeated subse-
quent visit at Cazenovia ana also during temporary
sojourn at the Westminster Hotel IN this city.
Az the latter place she AYERS tnat his
cruel treatment carried to that extent that
she endeavored to shrek Tor assistance, when he
stopped her cries by pressing his hand upon her
mouth She says that upon this occasion ho bit her
tho cheek, dragged her on the noor ana kicked her
lay PROSTATE and helpless One OF the causes
OF such alleged cruelty. she says, was his habit OF
drinking Lrandy ut night, on which occasions he
would drag her about the door and apply 20 her the
most opprobrlous epithets On occasion, she
says, he knocked her head from side 10 side aud alto
gether treated her In manner rendering 1t unsafe 70
FINAL ABANDONMENT.
Their domestic lie, she states additionally In her
complaint found but little interruption from this
series OF crueltes until the Both OF July, whom hc
brought her to this city. Ho took her, sne declares,
her fathers residence, No. n West Twelfth street.
Her father and mother were absent at The time. He
told her 10 break open her ather's desk that he
might examine his papers. Sne refused 10 obey this
command, when he treated her with great violence
and finally compelled her to accede to his de-
mand, alter which, she says, he took what
papers he wanted and then told hor he
was going to leave her, that he would not pay any
thing Tor her future support and that II she did not
acQuiesce quietly ana remain where she was he would
give her trouble. She states that he took her ear
her, upon her request portion OF her wardrobe,
fused TO send her her wedding presents and Jewelry.
She adds that she s sick account OF his treat
ment, and has ever since his abandonment OF her
lived solely on the charity OF her ricnda
THE CASE IN COURT
Before Judge Kn0xen there has already been some
proceedings IN the case, and recently an order In re-
gard it was gwen by Judge Westbrook at Kingston.
The matter camo yesterday before Judge Don0nue, in
Supreme Court, Chambers, on motion TO punish
the opposing counsel for alleged contempt in violating
Judge Westbrook's order In the argument upon tins
motion the plaintiff represented by Mr. A. Z. DAVIS
and the defendant by Congressman Hiscock Of Syra-
by the opposing counsel that suit had already been
brought by Mr.. Mccarthy to Sci aside his marriage
with the plaintiff on the ground OF her alleged prev
marriage. Mr. Davis insisted upon his right to
apply for counsel fec aud amony IN the present suit
aud finally the papers were submitted on both sides
Accompany ing the complaint OF the plaintiff were also
aldavis OF her iathor and mother partly c0rrobora
tive OF her statements and particularly
aeiendants saying before his marriage that he was
worth $3.50 600 and had settled Sb0, 900 upon her.