The Marlboro democrat. [volume] (Bennettsville, S.C.) 1882-1908, 1905-11-17
Obtained ID Georgia Valid In
South Carolina.
AN INTERESTING CASE
Tried and Decided In a Lexington Coun.
tv Court. William westmorelaud,
Who Was Divorced In Georgia,
Convicted of Adultery by
a Petit Jury.

o'oo VI ~uuuoudlty lNl0ltou WdS
tried aud decided In the court OF gen,
eral session at Lexington on Thurs
day. The Columbia State says the
final decision Of the supreme court IL
the case may afr ct the validity Of
several marriages In South Carolina
where one or the other parties to II
obtained a divorce in the State o.
Georgia.
In 1876 William Westmcreland, 8
we'll TO- do merchant, farmer and post
master at Samarla, In this. county
married Miss Malsey Duffey, also 0
this county. Seven children were the
result of the union.
In 1895 he applied to the superior
court CT Augusta, Ga, for q d vorct
on the ground that in 1892 his wife
Malsey WestmOreland, had deserted
him and was still descrting him. A
copy of his petition was solved upon
his wife, who did not oppose the pro,
ceedings.
On the finding of the jury in the dl-
vorce proceedings, Judge &c. H.. Gal.
loway, judge Of the superior court OF
Richmond county, Georgia, ordered
and decreed, that the said William
Westmoreland and the said Malsey
Westmoreland be, and they are here.
by, totally divorced from each other
And 1t was ordered that they each
be privileged to marry again without
any restraint imposed by their said
marriage to each other"
Two years after this decree was
granted William Wastmoreland mar
ried again and went to housekeeping
with his bride, nee Miss Adora Bur.
CESS, In the community Of is South
Carolina home. Th,ec children are
the result Of this second marriage.
And now come the neighhois OF that
Vicinity, in which Westmoreland has
lived with his second wife for SIX
years, and indict him for adulterousl,
living with her! His trial today result
ed In a verdict OF guilty, and Judge
Gage imposed a sentence on West
moreland Of four months on the chain
gang, or pay a fine Of S40O. The result
Of this verdict Is far reaching, and moi
only aft acts Westmoreland himself
and his second wife, but practically
Culk uloulACD UhC SIiII(ICu VI UIllS sec
ond marriage as fastards.
The supreme court will have sew
eral very interesting questions to set
tile In this case.
This Is the first time, on the Grim
4 rslnCt Il NJ Ntl1f,a case OF I'll
kind has arisen, and for that reason
1T will be we'll to'giva the main lega
features Of the proceedings, as the ii
nal status Of the case will blisf
Q. precedent, and the declaration O
the supreme court OF Stulh Carolins
will lay down the law more cleall,
with reference to this matter Of com
lily between The States and jurisdic
tiOn of the person.
AS a defense to The charge against
him Westmoreland, through his couu.
sci, offered the decree OF divorct
granted him by the superior court
OF Augusta, separating him from his
first wife and also the marriage license
he obtained from the ordinary court
of Augusta and the marriage certih
cate OF the justice OF peace who
united him Ia the holy bones OF
matrimony to Miss Adnsa Burgess,
S wa WIN
The State'a position was that the
diyQycse w estmoreland obtained IN
Georgia was no good for tile reason, as
the solicitor contended, that tho
courts Of Georgia had lo Jurisdiction
over Westmoreland, az he vas rot &
citizen of Georgia, but Of South Caro-.
lima. And to IA bstantiate this con,
tendon evidence was introduced tC
show that WestmOteland's claim t(
citizenship as a GeOrgsan only went
to the extent Of his renting . room ir
Augusta, which he only occasionally
occupied, once OF twice q month
when he would make a flying visit tt
Augusta, and that he had never a
bandoned his South Carolina citizen
ship; that o temporary absence from
the State does not change the rOsi
dence or domicle Of o person.
There was q good deal Of evidenct
introduced tending TO prove tina
W~estmoreland never permameptl!
abandoned or intended to abondol
his South Carolina residence an(
therefore, could not ne said to hav,
been q citizen Of Augusta. The prjn
cipal fight In the cas- was on tn
point of Jurisdiction and whether O
not the Judgment Of a foreign court
was binding upon the court Of trla
now sitting on the case. On these
points Judge Gage charged the jurS
In substance as follows:
did the defendant WestmOYelant
go to Georgia with an honest purpose,
an honest heart, TO make Georgia
his home, to acquire q residence IN
Georgia, to be q Georgian? if he
did. and while q resident there, Geor
gia gave him a divorce, then the di.
yorce binds and ought to protect him
in this prosecution; but the law is the
essence Of common sense and Justice,
1t is net q trick. For q man to &C.
quire o residence in a place he must
not only put his body there for d
time, but he must have the purpose
In his heart to have. that place as bis
residence. Did the defendant go tC
Georgia with, an ), honest purpose tC
make his home In Georgia and having
Georgia for his residence? II ne did
then the court had jurisdiction Oi his
cause. But II he went to Georgia foI
q temporary purpose, for no purpose
to acquire o. residence there, but &c
GET a divorce there and come back
into South Carolina claiming q iivor-
ce, then the court OF Georgia never
had Jurisdiction Of the cause. IL he
acquired O. residence in South Caro-
lima o temporary change Of 1t would