The Mount Holly news. [volume] (Mount Holly, Burlington Co., N.J.) 1891-1942, 1893-06-27
A Divorce Refused.

Vice. hanc ellor Green, on Tuesday, re-
fused to grant decree of divorce to Mrs.
Julia Disborough, of Bordentown, whose
bill of complaint alleged extreme cruelty.
The Vice hancellor's opinion stated that
no personal violence inflicted or threat
ened had been shown. The evidence
shows that the tastes Of the couple were
not similar, and that defendant insisted
on cooking his own meals, but he provid-
ed his wife with everything she desired.
Mrs. Disborough charged that her hus-
band used vile and indecent language to
her and of and concerning her to her re-
latives and friends. but these remarks
were not in connection with any demon
stration of violence or threats of bodily
injury. The Vice-Chancellor says: II do
not think that any of these charges or the
evidence which has been produced to sus-
tain them, in any way iustifes decree
under the section of the act which is in
voked by this bill. The case. if sustained
at all, must rest upon the charge that in
October, 1889, the defendant, Isaiah Dis
borough, accused-his wife and her son
Frank, and caused them to be arrested on
the charge Of conspiracy to administer
poison to him.
1t will be remembered that there was
considerable commotion in this county
over the charges made by Mr.. Disborough
that his wife had attempted to poison him
"a charge that was never sustained, how
ever. The testimony on this point was
reviewed, at great length, by the Vice
Chancellor, in connection with Mrs. Dis
borough's application for divorce. He
quoted from the decision of Judge Church,
of New York, in divorce case in that
state, as follows:
eff it shall appear that the threats of
violence were of such character as to in
duce reasonable apprehension of bodily
injury, and that the charges of infidelity
were made in bad faith as auxiliary to,
and in aggrayation OF, the threatened vio-
lence, think this plaintiff may be en-
titled to relief in this action. IT, on the
other hand, these charges were made in
good faith, and especially if the defendant
had reasonable grounds for believing
them true and if the threats proceeded
from mere casual ebulitions OF passion and
were used to emphasize the charges which
the defendant had reason to believe were
true and without any real intention to in
flict bodily harm, and if the plaintiff had
no sufficient reason for so believing, it is
clear she would not be entitled to q d.
vorce. If husband has reason to suspect
bis wife of infdelity, 1t is neither cruel
nor inhuman to charge her with it, al
though personal violence is not justifable"
This opinion Vice Chancellor Green
then applied to the case before him, and
said II am not prepared to say, that, all
things considered, the defendant did not
have reasonable grounds for making the
complaint which he did. There is no
doubt of his serious illness on the day that
he went to Trenton, and that this illness
was attended with symptoms of arsenical
! poisoning. The discovery by him of a
, powder in his wife's bureau drawer and
, the contradictory statements made by her
with reference to there being powder
there and its character, her 'evident es-
traneement. and the threatening letters
found by him In the same hiding place ss
/ the powder, with the fact Of his continued
, sickness and other circumstances not de-
/ tailed, but which appear in the evidence
, would, think, lead great many men ia
/ the suspicion in good faith that an attempt
/ had been made upon him. There lie nc
/. occasion to inquire in this proceeding
> whether the defendant did In fact know
lingly and wilfully administer this sub
!. stance to her husband. the only question