37 N.J. Eq. 195 | New York Court of Chancery | 1883
A divorce is asked for in this case, on the ground of fraud. Two and a half months after the marriage the defendant gave birth to a fully-developed child. The complainant declares that he is not the father of it. Taking this to be true, then what ?
The complainant says that he “ was induced by the enticements and allurements ” of the defendant “ to have sexual intercourse with her, and that afterwards (about two months) she represented
Then why should he have been deceived by her entreaties or representations? He knew of her dishonor; he knew as well that she would deceive. He had participated with her in crime; why, then, should he be surprised by her falsehoods ? She advertised her infidelity as well as her unchastity.
But the avenue for full information was before him. The
The master reports neither for nor against the petitioner, but encourages the favorable action of the court because of the youth and good standing of the complainant. He was of the age of twenty years; certainly not too young to know that he both violated the law of his country and sinned against the honor and integrity of the family which he now holds up as a shield. Good standing is a tower of strength to the innocent • but the confessedly guilty are on the- same level as any other ■wrong-doer.
There is no countenance in law for the prayer of the complainant. It is expressly repudiated in Carris v. Carris, 9 C. E. Gr. 516.
I shall advise that the bill be dismissed.