The New York herald., 1879-07-30

A JUSTICES DECISION IN A SUIT FOR ABANDON
MENr-BARBARA RAU's RELATIONS WITH
WILLIAMSBURG LAWYER.
Justice Semer. of Brooklyn, rendered decision
yesterday in the singular suit of Barbara Eau
against Counsellor Jacob Meinzer, of Williamsburg.
The parties to the action first met at picnic in
1876 Some time after they agreed to live together
and wife, and did so. One evening in tho
latter part of February. 1877, by arrangement they
visited the residence of friend and there
celebrated their alleged nuptials, which, it
said. had been performed by the Mayor of
Brooklyn. There several invited guests and
at the conclusion Of the festivities the plaintiff aud
defendant left in carriage. In the month of June
following Rev. John Neander, Of Williamsburg.
baptized their child under the name of Caroline
Meinzer. The parents of the child present at
the time. Menzer finally left Barbara and the child
and afterward sued for abandonment. Wit
nesses were produced who swore that defendant had
introduced plaintiff his wife. In his decision
Justice Semler. after reviewing the facts already
enumerated refers to agreement of separation
signed by both parties as principals. and Mr..
Neander witness "ln this curious document.
dated August a. 1877 the Justice continues Jacob
Meinzer agrees with Barbara Nleinzer that he
possession OF all the household furniture (pur-
chased with her own money now contained in our
DWELLING even il he should marry and until she
marries, whereupon she releases him from all
further liability to her. The woman to have
considered this paper q dissolution OF whatever
tie existed between her and Meinzer and. in weigh-
ing it's effects i'll this have considered that the
defendant is a lawyer, and that, all the facts
herein show, she is quite conhding and Ignorant
The alleged abandonment took place week
thereafter, in September. After that and up to
April, 1878, Meinzer paid to barbara $22. y
The common law doctrine that marriage to be valid
must have been celebrated III ecciesiG, has long
been exploded in this State. and proof that parties
cohabited together xs husband and wife under the
reputation of being married and representing them
husband and wife, and by declarations
to each other and to third parties acknowledged.
themselves as such. Is sufficient evidence OF legal
marriage between the parties. Ii the defendant, as
he alleges. agreed with plaintiff to impose respect
able society by holding her out as his wife, court
of justice is not the place for him to set up such im
moral and fraudulent actions defence to pro-
ceeding of this kind. And, besides that believe the
statement of Barbara in this respect II 1t prac
tised for the purpose OF decevIng barbara pre-
pairing defence for the wrong he was about to COM
mt the plea is 90 ualy unavainnU.
The bastardy proceedings and the release by tho
Commissioners after payment by defendant of 500
do affect these proceedings brought tor the aban
donment OF the wife. No man can take advantage
OF his wrong. and when the rights of society.
good morals ana the confidence OF coniding women
comes in question. then it seems to me that the law
should be strictly construed. therefore find that
the plaintiff is defendants lawful wife, that the
proof of marriage il ample and sufficient. further
find the defendant guilty of abandonment. and ad-
judge that he be bound to pay to the support OF
the plaintiff the sum of $3 weekly for year, and
give bonds to the Commissioners to that effect"