Year: 1861




divorce case, which is likely to attract
attention, from the nature of the
very peculiar developments to be made, will
shortly be tried in the District Court of SUIT
-er county. Mrs Jane A. Noe sues for a di-
vorce from Bart. l.. Noe, (for a long time a
resident of this city, on the ground mainly Of
alleged neglect and cruel treatment. Noe
on his part, that he has been most
grossly outraged by the conduct of his wife
for number of years past, and that, so faT
from treating her badly, she has most brutally
treated him.


The answer which he has filed to her COM
plant sets forth, We are informed, the follow
ing points:


That it is true. as set forth in the plaintiff $
complaint, that plaintiff and defendant were
married in 1884, and lived together as hus-
band and wife till February, 1861; that for
several Years past they have resided in Cali
fornia that the issue of their marriage was
two children, boy nineteen years of age and
another eleven that it is not true, that, dur
ing this time. the plaintiff conducted hersel
with propriety, and treated defendant kind
ly, although she managed her household
affairs properly enough that it is not tru'
that he, the defendant, has treated her harsh
ly for the last five years that it is not true
that during the time specified, he ever a'
saulted and beat her; that it is not true that


he is q man of violent and ungovernable pas


sons that it is not true as she alleges, that
! he ever threatened to take her life THAT it i:
not true that he ever neglected to support an(
provide for his family that it is not true thai
certain real estate Ga house and lot in Marys.
ville) was puchased with the proceeds o
| plaintiffs own labor, DC.


And furthermore, as we are informed. Mr.
Noe makes, in his answer, the following
charges against his wife:


That about four years ago he began to dis
cover change in her conduct towards him
and total disregard of the proprieties OF
life that her general conduct was such as to
arouse his supicions of her chastity that she
at divers times, came at him furiously and
made violent attacks upon his person; that
she, on various occasions, threatened to split
open his head with an axe, and frequently
threatened to poison him that she was in the
habit of going out at night, alone, refusing to
be accompanied by her husband that on or
about the 7th of February 1861, he was up
about daylight, reading a newspaper in the
bar-room of the hotel he was then keeping in
Yuba City, and using candle to assist his
eyesight, when the plaintiff came into the
room, talking aDgrily, and attempting to
forcbly take the candle out of his hands 8;
that he took her by the shoulders and pushed
her out of the bar-room, and, in doing So,
stepped upon her dress, whereupon they both
! fell to the floor, 10y accident, and this is the
only violence he ever offered to her in the
whole course of his life that for this act, she
him of assault and battery and succeeded in
having him sentenced to the County Jail for
fifteen days; that, for more than week be-
fore this occurrence, she almost constantly
beset him with petty outrages of like charac-
ter. tearing up his newspapers and throwing
the fragments in his face; that after he got
out of Jail, he was informed of the previou:
conduct of his wife, with respect to one Henry
Shade, and charges that about the first day
of June 1857, the defendant was guilty o
adultery with the said Shade, and was gull
ty afterwards of the same offense with tn
said Shade, on several occasions; he charge
also that the plaintiff, about the first day {
August, 1851, administered poison to hin
and afterwards again administered poison
him, on the first day of September, follow
ing.


On these grounds, he asks that the apple
tion of the plaintiff for divorce from hi
be denied, and that he be granted divorc
from her. He also prays for the care an
custody of his children, and for an equal d
vision of property between himself and Il
plaintiff.


1t is customary, we believe for the pape
below to comment on cases of this charact,


but we refrain from any remarks relative


the merits of the case, not caring to give


opinion in advance of the legal tribunal.