National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1886-06-16
D1ssoLv1NG MARRIAGE.
What Makes the Divorce Market APP
pear so Brisk and Strong.

Justice Merrick is not very favorably In
clined toward the divorce law, and looks
upon divorce cases with still less favor, and
when he directs a decree drawn to annul
marriage II is because the proof ia remark
ably strong to sustain the charges made and
which the law recognizes as grounds upon
which divorce may be granted. He is also
Satisfied with the work performed in this
direction without receiving credit for the
work OF one Of his associates, which has
recently been given tohim. Hewas yester-
day announced as granting the divorce In
the case OF Evely against Evely, while, In
fact, the decision was made by Justice
James, but the entry having been made as
taking place In the equity court held by
Justice Merrick, the latter was announced
as having granted tho application.
10 those not conversant with the opera
lions Of the courts and conducting Of cases
i would appear, at times, especially about
the advent OF summer, as II divorces were
being granted by the wholesale. This Is
easy OF explanation. As the heated term
approaches attorneys, as general thing,
are anxious TO keep out OF the courts, and
avoid prosecuting their cases, and con-
tinuance becomes the standing order. There
is but one exception to the rule, aud that
is the attorneys having divorce cases In
charge. Their clients are pressing, anx-
ious to secure release from the matri.
monial yoke, and the lawyers are no less
willing to have their cases before the
chancellor for final disposition. This state
OF Affairs will lump the divorce cases, and
the judge holding the equity court Is
likely, In the month OF June aud July, TO
have as high as thirty Of them on his calen-
dar, and be the only cases ready for hear
I'M Ia &c Fs,,.
the divorce market is remarkably healthy.
That time has about arrived, and divorces
are likely TO be frequently announced dur
ing this and the coming month.
Justice Merrick yesterday dismissed the
bill Of Susette McNally applying for d.
vorce from Thomas McNally. She charged
adultery, and that her husband was serving
a term In the penitentiary, having been con-
victed OF robbing the mails. The court held
that the first charge was not sustained by
proof, and that the second was not sufficient
ground under the law for the granting Of
divorce.
Annie A. Freeland was more fortunate
than the preceding applicant, and Justice
Merrick directed decree dissolving the
marriage between her and James W. Free
land, also giving her the custody Of their
child. Mr.. Campbell Darlington appeared
as her solicitor, and the petition showed
N. G., Oct. @, 1881. Some seven months
later, with the consent Of her husband, she
paid q visit to her mother. On her return
home her father-in-law invited her TO "come
and see the destruction She found all
the furniture and her ornaments destroyed
and was Informed that her husband was
carrying loaded pistol In his pocket with
the intention Of taking her life. The
father-in.law thought It unsafe for her to
be In that locality, aud advised her to go
back to her mother, which she deemed best
to do. Some three months later their child
was born, and from that time the husband
and father failed toscontribute to their sup
port.
Justice James, In finishing up cases
heard by him while sitting in the equity
court, has granted James ". Hayward d.
vorce from Sarah j. Hayward. Mr.. I. j.
Mackey was the plaintiffs solicitor, and
the petition states that the parties were
married at Edgeheld Court House, s. c.,
Nov. 20, 1870, and subsequently came to
this city to reside. They lived together
until June Q, 1888, when he charged aud
proved that she deserted him, and since that
time has failed and refused TO consort with
him as her husband,