Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1899-06-25
Divorce and Separate Estate.

cl,dirq livestock and household ana
ldtcaon furniture A. y. Browning the
husband. was also engaged in agriculture
bi1t upon a much less extensive scale
shortly after the marriage the tamly
went 10 reside upon the wiie's arm.
browning managed It FOR her. Ihey ulu
not get along well together suit ior
divorce was brought The wiie oled DC
fore il was granted. The HUSBAND, hle<''-
while. put in a claim for money ana IaooI
expended in running his wifes farm AS
statod he was allowed 81, S6l.39. The SUI
preme Court cuts down the amount 10
$3.50. with interest from July 3. 1871
Number Of the items allowed by the com
missioner Of the lower court were strlck-
on out entirely. The opinion was written
by Keith. i.
Another Divorce case
,rriro,le ,s Trimble is a divorce case
from the Circuit Court of Grayson county
In tho lower court the divorce was grant
"a tho wife was given the CUSTODY Vi
Tho 7-months-old child, and ahHohy
amounting TO S72 a year, payaDle qudi
tor,v The husband was torpludeH ~
disnose of his property, or 10 ehcuin-
Der it. .,. o,nears
fro,,, tho record that the husband "dS
incl 70 his wife; that he struck her WIN
his omen hands until there were Vi
,pon her person; that he thred'olOu w
tie her. and had rope proush' ioi -
ulrpoee. but afterwards aoihUD"o
and contentcd himself win 'ooh'H7 o,,I
door of the room in which they VIZ vi
-t,t,1iro in the other until he couid Ae,iN
,li,.1,hor to take her TO her 'nthei -
~, -, the neighbor came ne was
tnld nv the husband that ms Whe Hdu
- nuarrelling all night; that ne
,,,.,,ected TO live with her aholA'l "%s
49, sbo had to leave or thdt ne 49,
49, v,ben the neighbor suSges'eu &c
-. ouobt TO forgive each olhCr an" "
,ll1rc,lcd the wife got upon her 49, So,
'1 oelpd TO be forgiven for any 'Iline
- mat she had done, statlNg uld|
w.. IA not wish to go TO Ter IAN .
mt he was unable to take care ol NJ
,,,,+ +ho husband refused 10 be recohcii'"'
Uto+tn, that he was not going 10 t'N "
live with her; that on the same eNe -.,,,,.
Inc wife and their infant emu
With her clothing. were taken " - ~.
theirs house in conveyance III - w.
the husband. where she mas Sl,ce
NAMED. so far as the record ""o%S t tho
Although the record SHOWS .''ae che
,,.ifa ala not behave at all Zines us Silo
III ,.et we cannot say that the case
,,,oae did not warrant the Circuit C'uI,
,,ro,,t,no her q divorce from hed "llu
board. ,,rt e. of
0rr1S5 though amended so as 10 NAN nm
tbe alimony charge upon me 1 e.''I
instead of having the HUSBAND pI ~ NO
l., eniOiucd from disposng OF NJ P ~
rertv Judge Buchanan wrote the OP'"
'0 Murderer Gets n New Trial
1o,i,,o, We the Commonwealth, IRON
the circuit Court of Pulaski, OPINION DS
Ttloa Keith president, gives 70 my ~
pellant, who was convicted III t I,,roa -
court OF murder in the secon1 uJsa. ;ho
oey, trial The decision holds thal tlo
C,ircrit court erred in the matter OF III
structions to the jury. Jackson P. W
ishynent was fixed at seven years III ,lS
penitentary. The instruction oeo'u0u
Ia be erroneous was as follows:
"The court instructs the jury that -
tbov shall believe from the evidence luaI
,bcra W9s a ouarrel between the prisoner
and the deceased and That Dolh were a.
fault. and as result OF such 4uaa ,,, ~,
a combat took place. ana IN such Codn9 3
Tho urfsonar killed the deceased, III oIueI
90 ,ajtIca tho offence of the prisoner from
tbe degree OF murder two thlhss liuSO
appear from the EVIDENCE any e.a me
Stances Of the case: Oh Ihht pel, Ui1 DO
n,ortal wound was given the prisoner ue
lii,eJ further combat and retrtateu ~
90 as he could with safety; ah1 ~ . ii"s
L. 10 re.essarilV killed the deceased IN 3'uei
IN save his own life. or 10 pIeNo"' nm
self from great bodily harm a.. huo,cb
M opinion saws: in the first branGin
of This instruction the jury are cur 80
told that if they believe lrOln Tween
dence that there was a quafIei nC' 49,
The prisoner and the deceased an Of
rath we're nj fault and as a result ~
his quarrel a combat took Place, 81 ~
which the prisoner xii ed the decsaS9"dd
Tho homicide Was murder III 'nrot mo
dloree II then proceeds 10 lnstruCx w
80. tbat i'm order to reduce the oIcnce
9frd1, thn degree of murder. II mus n
Toar from the evidence mat pViOtS 70
mortal wound was given the pr's '',ot, In
M M "a as FAR as ne could with S"letN ia
-. -, - save his own life ana Pro'ThCee
SHiiTuns.1f from great bodily harnl, III ,,,o
sncnD5 branch OF this Instruction.
think there is error
A case of Deceit
Ruck ct ais. vs. Ward ct ais RON quiz Nv
Circnit Court OF Smythe COUNT, 'astatc
inr "A charge OF deceit III ,9arniIa inter-
transaction. possesses coi'''''
IL appears that r. \. War War; o~ conpty'
certain tract of land In SlnS S,ad 10 he
uuon which there were supP11 - q, or
,'alnabie mineral deposits. ana tn"' a. ne
SS"r""D af,rct p, sale of the properly,
,'.sociated with him as secret ahe", ''rior
~ 1,rnvyn and G.. r.. Cox. Some lllllV P'I,Vy
80 January 2 1880 The complain tth 90
a. fuck. W. A. Richmond. j.. w. 1Oi hS,,
WI & 4 Flanagan were approeCheu ~
1,,D,rr and Cox. who said they hhcM ~
ia - Ward well; that Il had NSIS Sn
,,,ior~oIs on it, and that Tor $S'Vvy "a"
ond 81 so to be paid IN SIN ii'ontt.t o,,.oIs
a,'J could be obtained for the miheIuIs'
"p r,,, for six months, and WOuld sIdns
NE right within six months 70 Wv IVY
80 80 minerals by the use OF machlleiy' -,
~, scn,ns that a company, c0nlposeu vi
80, cox. Buck Richmond, Peery, any
-, - wv ., VA, formed for the purpose OF
,', ,'l', The property upon the 'ei iils
i,,,tunirtionrd il not being known ma nt
i,rn,,,, and Cox were the secre' asvntn -
IVord IL is 0Vcrred in the PHI 'n 49,.
w ",u and cox gave checks TO nara ~" 1p
brown ~ a., ~ the s. 900 which was SLOW
IA 500 respectively. but thal these ~
or destroyed ana mat ny ny
with ward dlViueu 'Ne
Tbe comnlainants spent 8, 1900 III pros
tt,o, ON the land. and in the puiShdso
~ SVr,mS interest bought by Peery. Buck:
oI pro,yn for $3.50 each. The prayer OF
r. hin of complaints was that the op ~,
~. c,,fract be annulled. and that al.
Inc money they had paid OUT. to'"i u
: ~ 4, with interest. be rePaiu' ,,,
Indee Cardwell wrote the OPINION, WIZ
tnids that there H. no deed 10 De VacA.,u.
10 impediments TO be reHo'eu l,on. n.
~ 10 ~ the complainants In enforcement
va Wa or renedy. if any they have, at law
III Court is Of opinion that the demur-
80 should have been sustained ana tne
al, disnsjssed on the ground that the COM
niainants had, II any, incomplete eei-