The Lambertville record. [volume] (Lambertville, N.J.) 1872-1968, 1882-12-06

4 Re.Arguing Divorce Case.
The case of Rev. Joseph j. Summer.
bell, OF Milford, N. j., and Martha Alice
Summerbell, came up 10 the Court of
Errors and Appeals, Tuesday morning of
last week The proceedings, which are
for divorce, were instituted by the hus-
band on the ground OF adultery charged
against his wife. Barker Gummere, as
master in chancery, heard the testimony
in the case and held that the parties were
not entitled to divorce. An appeal was
then made TO the Court of Errors and
Appeals. and at the last term, after the
matter had been fully argued, the judges
were equally divided on the question Of
reversing the chancellor's decree. Under
the practice of the court, the decree was
thereby affirmed, but Attorney General
Stockton, of c,unspl for The husband,
gave notice of an Intention to move for
re-argument at The next term. In order
to aif"rd him an opportunity for ~ doing,
Judge Depue moved that the records in
the case be kept open
When the attorney general brought up
his nm,inn at The beginning uf the present
term, u was laid aver Till The first con-
ference. when the c,.urt ordered that
counsel an bnth sides be heard tina, day.
W. ID Hs,lt aud Mercer Beasley. Jr., APP
peared for the appellee, aud Attorney
General Stockton for the appellant. Mr..
ISeaslry raised the point that, as the
question was upon re-arguing the case,
only such judges as were present at the
first argument could now vote, because
they alone knew whether re-argument
was necessary. The attorney general
replied that ono OF the reasons urged in
favor of 4 re-argument was that there had
not been full bench at the last argu-
ment. He cited cases TO show that where
constitutional point is involved, as
claimed in the present Instance, the
courts have ordered re-arguments, In or
der that The full bench might pronounce
'.pon the matter. A re-argumentwas not
asked as q legal right, but was left to the
discretion of the court Mr.. Holt asked
how those judges who were absent at the
first argument could have discretion on
the subject of a re-argument.
In the printed petition to the court,
Summerbell suggests two reasons for a
re-argument ; first, that five members Of
the court, eligible in the case, were not
present at the argument and secondly,
that in the legal principles involved, the
question of confession (of the wife az to
her guilt ever presented, and should have
the fullest discussion before the court and
the consideration of all the members of
the court. The whole question seems to
turn on the admission of the confessions
made by the wife. Ii these are entitled
to credit, the petitioner claims that no is
entitled to divorce. The petitioner says
he is pastor of church in Milford, and
believes he has retained the confidence of
his congregation.
The court went into conference on
hearing counsel on both sides. Upon the
re-opening of tho doors, Judge Green, one
of the judges who voted for the sifirmanc
of the chancellor's decree at the last
term, moved that rehearing be ordered
ON the petition Of the appellant. The
motion was carried, ten judges voting in
the Affirmative and none in the negative,
aud the whole case will be heard at tn,
next term Trenton Times.