Jackson v. Jackson

• Decision Date: 03 March 1890
• Citation: 11 S.E. 173,105 N.C. 433
• Parties: JACKSON v. JACKSON.
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

11 S.E. 173

105 N.C. 433

JACKSON v. JACKSON.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

March 3, 1890

This was an action for divorce tried at October term, 1889, of the superior court of Wake county, before ARMFIELD, J.

The complaint was as follows: "Cornelia A. R. Jackson, the plaintiff in the above-entitled action, complains of the defendant, Daniel Jackson, and says: (1) That she was lawfully married to the said Daniel Jackson about A. D. 1845; that she has been a true and faithful wife to him, and they raised several children. (2) That up to a few years ago she has lived with the said Daniel Jackson in comparative peace and quiet, doing her duty faithfully as a wife and mother. (3) That since his severe sickness (about 1884) he has become in a measure impotent, and generally sequence became violently jealous of her, the said plaintiff, and began to treat her cruelly and barbarously, so as to endanger her life,--frequently, at night, when no other person in the house was awake, taking his fist, and threatening to mash her brains out,--and that in consequence she was afraid to retire to rest at night. (4) That recently he maliciously turned her out of doors, and refused to allow her to return to her home threatening that if she did so return he would kill her. (5) That the tract of land on which the said Daniel Jackson now resides, and from which he turned her out, is her separate estate, and she also has some articles of personal property now in the possession of the defendant; that the defendant's annual income is about $500. Therefore she prays the court (1) that she be granted a divorce from bed and board from the defendant Daniel Jackson; (2) and for alimony; (3) for her costs in this action, and for such other relief as the court shall direct."

After denying specifically each allegation of the complaint, for a further defense, defendant says: "(1) That some time during the summer of 1888 his wife did go from home to a certain place he was opposed to her going, to-wit, to a certain church of which defendant had been a member, which church had been recently removed from the old place, where it was originally located, against the defendant's will and desire, and after its removal he did not wish his wife to go to the same, and he was angry when she did go; but he soon got over his anger, and tried to get plaintiff to come back to her home, and live as she had done for so many years promising to treat her kindly, and permit her to go where she pleased, and come when she chose. Defendant offered to divide his land with her, and give bond that he would in no wise impose on her. For two years past, plaintiff has not demeaned herself towards defendant as a wife should. (2) That defendant has no ill feeling towards his wife, but is earnestly desirous that she should return to her home; that she has been to his house once since she left and offered to come and live with defendant if he would enter into a bond in the sum of two hundred dollars not to mistreat her, which defendant then and there agree to do, and parted with her with this understanding. But defendant is informed and believes that she was dissuaded from coming back to her home by other parties; and he believes that, if she was left free from persuasion of others, she would return, and live with him, as he desires she should, and as she agreed to do. (3) That defendant is a cripple, unable to walk without a crutch which he has had to use for thirty-six years. He is in the sixty-fourth year of his age. His property consists of a tract of land containing one hundred and thirty-five acres one horse, and hogs, a little house furniture, a few farming tools, and a small amount of provisions on hand,--not more than enough to last him three months. This constitutes defendant's whole property. He has no income beyond a support from his farm, and last year his farm did not pay expenses. He is unable to work, and has to depend on the labor of others to make a support out of his land; and a bare support is all that it will yield him, especially in the absence of his wife,--he having to hire everything done. Defendant is anxious that his wife should return to her home and offers to live in peace with her, and make her home as pleasant as it is in his power to do, and provide for her to the extent of his ability."

There was evidence from the plaintiff and other witnesses tending to show that defendant, for a number of years, by cruel and barbarous treatment endangered the life of plaintiff, and that defendant on numerous occasions offered such indignities to the person of plaintiff as to render her condition intolerable, and life burdensome; that this occurred over six months before the filing of the complaint. The witness testified that defendant upon many occasions drove plaintiff from his bed, and inflicted serious bodily injury upon her person, by kicking, bruising, and the like, and on one occasion struck her on the head a terrible blow with a large stick, and nearly killed her, and that defendant continued this treatment until he maliciously turned plaintiff out of doors, a few days before this action was brought; and there was no exception to this evidence. His honour withheld the third issue from the jury because it appeared in evidence that the defendant turned plaintiff out of doors within six months before the complaint was filed; and all the issues set out in the record (except the third issue, which was withdrawn from the jury) were found in favor of the plaintiff. Upon the question of alimony, the court offered to hear evidence from the defendant. No evidence was introduced by him; and the court, being satisfied that the alimony set out in the judgment was reasonable and fair, after hearing the evidence, gave the judgment set out in the record. Defendant offered to prove that after the commencement of this action he had sent word to plaintiff to come back and live with him, and he would "treat her just as he always had." The court excluded this testimony, and the defendant excepted. Verdict for plaintiff. Appeal by defendant. There issues and findings were as follows "(1...