Year: 1868

From the n. Y. Tribune, 29thI


The Northenderpublishes an outline OF
what must certainly prove most ex-
traordinary case, as the trial OF 1t pro-
gress 8 in our city courts In May OF
June. A lady brings an action rslan,
der against gentleman, on the GROUND
that he "on divers occasions had said.
she is my wife, and can prove IT,"
This language the defendant admits
using, reiterates .he words, and affirms
alse that he is regularly and legally
married to the woman, and that they
have cohabited for many months. The
couple became acquainted, as he al
firms, in the Spring of 1868, at time
when the complainant was a teacher
| in q public school, and the defendant a


member of a State Volunteer regiment.
In 1864, he was on duty in quarter
masters depot on one of the adjoining
islands. In the interim of the period
Just mentioned they had apparently be.
come much attached to each other, and
an engagement of marriage was nutu-
ally agreed upon. In the year last
noted, it was supposed that the young
man was soon to be ordered to the front,
and as they feared they were about be-
ing separated, possibly forever, imme-
diate marriage was resolved upon; but,
owing to the lady's desire to retain her
situation as teacher during her hus-
bands absence they determined to keep
the marriage secret. A few days after
this had been settled upon, the young
soldier came to the city to make suitable
arrangements for the wedding. 1t was
concluded that they should depart FROM
her house for the ostensible purpose OF
visiting the theatre, and the marriage
should take place during their absence.
This was all carried out; they called at
Methodist clergyman's house, and the
ceremony was performed III the presence
OF his wife and other witnesses, the
young school teacher receiving the mar
riage certificate, and the young soldier
paying the clergyman's fee. They sub
sequently went to the theatre, and
spent the remainder of the evening
there, returning to their home at a
seasonabls hour.


But the new made husband was not
ordered into active service, and, the
war terminating, was honorably dis
charged, and returned to mercantile
pursuits. He then won't to the house OF
the young lady's relatives to board; and,
although they resided under the same
roof, the marriage was still kept secret.
This continued for some two years,
when, for some reason, the wife took a
dislike to her husband, and has since
refused to recognize him. The affair ex-
cited considerable comment, not, as may
be supposed, of tlattering character,
and the trustees of the school in which
the lady was employed, hearing of the
clandestine marriage and conduct of
the wife, sent for the husband to obtain
an explanation, the result of which was
a request that the teacher resign. her
position. She then retaliated by visiting
the mercantile house where the husband
was employed, and obtained his dis
charge, following this by the commence.
ment of suit against him for SANDER. All
these allegations by the defendant and
his friends are positively denied by the
complainant and her friends. The lady
vehemently denies that she was ever
married to this or any other gentleman,
ard saws that she knew the
young soldier only as an acquaintance,
and nothing Of the kind described by
him has ever occurred between them;
that it is a case of mistaken identity in
regard 10 the occasion in the clergy
mans parlor, that she never was there
on that or any other occasion. The
clergyman involved distinctly remem-
bers the gentleman, but is not certain
as to the lady; and the counsel OH either
side are determined to make the civil
suit merely preliminary to criminal in
dictment of the opposing counsers
client. The testimony in the case will
be read with interest.