OCR Text |
Show M aril nl I nfid.-Iify 11 ( the Ht-loui Ht-loui ol the H altiorlh .YlniMlcr. Chicago, (. A Xew York special says the Kev. Father Preston, vice-chancellor vice-chancellor of this diocese, who was very intimate with the late Mansfield T. Walworth and enjoyed his fullest confidence, says that the obscene letters let-ters referral to by the prisoner and lijs ixiendo as haying betMi die caiuu of the runnier, contained (ho accusation accusa-tion against Mrs. Walworth uf indiscriminate indis-criminate iulidelily ami assertions that Frank is a bastard. The imu-deral imu-deral man's friends say that ample proof will be brought forward, at l ite trial, 'jl" neoc-s-ajy, o csiabjUlt he fact that Mr, Walworjh had out too much grounds for tho charges against his wife. Thoy say that ho sustainal improper relations with her himself, G months before their marriage, mar-riage, and that only upon this ground would their parents consent to their union. TJihi latier litcp Is ho bals of the' slur upon Frank's birth, which incited the young man tu take summary sum-mary veiigence upon its author. Early in January, 1S.1, Mrs. Walworth's Wal-worth's action for a separation began. The decree asked lor wiw a limilal divwrce on !he ground of cruel and iu-hiunan iu-hiunan lreatmenl. Atlultery wan not chargal in the papers, nor was any prayer made lor absolute divorce. The summons ami complaints were served on tho murdered man on the 27th of January, 1871. Xo notice wiW taken, however, by the defendant. He allowed iho ipaiter i gu by default. de-fault. Shortly nlterwmU, Bu.shfurd F. Pico, referee in tho case, reported granting the decree nt the .special ierm of tho (Superior Court, belbre Justice Jiunes E. Spencer. The de-ureo- was conlirmal. Tlio divorce contained a clauep cuinpolliug (.Iil, nnuxlercil man tu pay his wife certain sums of money for her uuppori, and also for the support of her children. Mr. Walworth seemed very much exasperated, ex-asperated, when he heard of the entering en-tering of the decree, lor the reason that it compelled him to pay alimony ali-mony to Mrs. Walworth, anil also to support the childron. In the next May following, in oixlei to avoid paying lUiniouy, hi-, f-onn?e made a motion in the Superior Cour 4 to open the default anil set aside tlu decree. This motion was never nr gued. After matters hail rested awhih 4 correspond enco began between tin counsel, and a compromise was ollected, by which tho clause in tin 0 decree allowing alimony to the di voreed wife was stricken out. In al other respects, however, it was allowa " to stand. |