Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1883-03-12
NAMING THE BABY.
Family Dispute that Ends in n Sepa-
ration and Divorce Suit.

Astc 4 01H Herdid.
John W, RrittOn, his wife and his
! uauShter Mary a. appeared in special
term OF the Supreme Court before ,Judpe
LarremOre, Thursday, as the promoters
OF suit on the part of the daughter to
! obtain decree of separation from her
husband, Charles Appleby, on the ground
| OF cruel and inhuman treatment and abap.
donment. The father of the plaintiff an
| peared quite substantial, AID the ladies
were richly dressed, the mother in plain
SIX with sealskin coat, and the daugh ter
IN a suit OF embossed silk. Both wore
black velvet hats, that OF the older lady
| being decked out with some topknots Of
| the same color, while on that of the
| younger was bound a tropical bird of
brilliant plumage, with one wing left
loose to tlutter in the breeze.
The parties to the suit were married in
October, 1877, and Until October 10, 1881,
llVed together in the house of the wife's
parents, when the husband left and took
up mrs quarters elsewhere. A shors time
after this the wife commence; me present
suit.
In her COMPLAINT she charged that at
various slmes during the four years they
lived together her husband used threaten
ing and abusive language toward her, put
ting her in Of bodily harm, and that
he finally abandoned her and neglected to
provide Tor her and her children, leaving
them to be supported by the bounty of her
parents. The defendant denied in his
answer the allegations of cruelty, and
asserted that on one occasion his wife
threatened him with her oienched fist. and
tnat he is now and always has been ready
TO proviG9 Aer with a suitable home any-
Where but IN her fathers house, but that
she has refused to so with him, On the
. trIaI Doth sides abandoned the charges of
j GrlnltU Al. =
allOWed TO rest solely on the charge of
abandonment.
They had two children born to them,
one named Fanny Britton and the other
John Britton, and the naming of these
children. accordlEa 10 the testimony,
seems to have been the most potent cause
OF dlssension. For the first, the mother
pc3poseu the name she now has, in honor
OF her own mother. To this the husband
objected, saying he wished Che child
named after his. mother. "What is your
mothers I.aheY' inquired the wife.
Elizabeth Ann," was the reply. "Oh!
tnaCs hOrrid name" said the
wife; 81 wouldn't have any child
OF mine called that. She AUST De named
atter my mother al have no name
at all. ThiG vile had her way. The next
struggie came when the boy was born,
ms mother proposing to call him John
Brltton, after her father, This the hus-
band would not tolerate, and announced
his determinati0n never to yield the point.
On October 10, 1881, the day of the separa-
tiOn, she announced to him her final deter
mination to call the child John, and then
the cable parted, There had been some
slight dlsagreementS between the defend
ant and his mother-in-law on the question
OF soothing syrup after the birth of the first
child, and a little loud talk at table on
some other disputed point, but the forego-
ing appear to have been the r.ost aggra-
waiting circumstances cf the case. Testi
mony was also given ON behalf of the de-
fendant taat he had offered to make suit
able provision for his wife apart from her |
parents, even sending her d diagram of
the apartments for her approval. Counsel
for plaintiff contended that case of aban-
donment had been made out, while coun-
sci for defendant insisted on the Opposite.
Judge Larremore said the only question In
the case was that of abandonment. and
while reserving his Secisi6n, expressed
regret that the parties could not become
reconailed, ="