Marble v. Marble
| Decision Date | 24 April 1877 |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
| Parties | John P. Marble v. Emily U. Marble |
Submitted on Briefs April 12, 1877
Appeal in Chancery from Ingham Circuit.
Decree affirmed.
M. V & R. A. Montgomery, for complainant.
J. C Shields, for defendant.
This is a bill for divorce. The circuit court decreed for complainant, and defendant appealed. The charge of living "in open and notorious adultery" with William Martin is the only one to be considered. The proofs fail to support any other. It is objected that this charge is not a proper one in a divorce case. On consideration we are inclined to think the allegation is valid. The time and place are laid and the party incriminated with defendant is described and specified. As characterized bye the form of charge, the offense would seem to be more gross and noxious, more pernicious to society, than one consisting of a single private act. And there is no reason to suppose the pleading of it in this wise would cause any special hardship to the defendant.
The allegation would require as satisfactory proof of the adultery as though the offense were set out as composed of one act only, and the complainant would naturally be held to give evidence of the matter of aggravation also.
The evidence to show the fact of adultery is made up of circumstances. There is no direct proof of any single fact able to afford a conclusive or very stringent inference. But when all the circumstances are combined and the natural inferences and presumptions are allowed their due weight, the proof so presses and convinces that it is difficult to reject belief. The conduct of Martin in leaving his own family in the immediate neighborhood and staying with defendant as he did, their association and deportment towards each other and fondness for each other's society, their bearing even in the presence of third persons, their desire to be together her interference in his behalf, and the tone and character of it, her explanation to Mr. Mead in Martin's presence why Martin did not depart from her and consort with his wife, the inconsistent and unsatisfactory statements concerning Martin's ways and inducements, and several other incidents, when brought together, seem hardly capable of being accounted for and explained except upon the ground that the relation charged actually existed between these persons. The evidence of reputation was not admissible...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Talley v. Talley
... ... witnesses to testify on behalf of the respondent as to ... character: O'Bryan v. O'Bryan, 13 Mo. 16; ... Clement v. Kimball, 98 Mass. 535; Marble v ... Marble, 36 Mich. 386; Derby v. Derby, 21 ... N.J.Eq. 36, 39; Noel v. Noel, 24 N.J.Eq. 137, 140; ... Thomas v. Thomas, 51 Ill. 162; Hilker ... ...
-
Sutton v. State
...other evidence in the case to show relations of an equivocal character." See, also, Blackman v. State, 36 Ala. 295, 297; Marble v. Marble, 36 Mich. 386; State v. Mecum, 95 Iowa, 433, 64 N. W. 286; Com. v. Clifford, 145 Mass. 97, 13 N. E. 345; 2 Gr. Ev. (16th Ed.) § 44; Starke v. State, 97 G......
-
Hamilton v. Hamilton
...on, Herrick v. Herrick 31 Mich. 298, though a charge of living in open and notorious adultery with a person named, is enough, Marble v. Marble 36 Mich. 386. Evidence can given of facts which give character to those specified, Briggs v. Briggs 20 Mich. 34. Where a divorce is sought for cruel......
-
Sutton v. State
...there is other evidence in the case to show relations of an equivocal character." See, also, Blackman v. State, 36 Ala. 295, 297; Marble v. Marble, 36 Mich. 386; State v. Mecum, 95 Iowa 433, 64 N.W. 286; v. Clifford, 145 Mass. 97, 13 N.E. 345; 2 Gr. Ev. (16th Ed.) § 44; Starke v. State, 97 ......