Semi-Weekly Wisconsin Saturday May 11, 1867
o^Q^at OourroTtippk 1 Ca" --• • "• '-- c NEWS AND MJSCELLNAY SIKfiDUft JMTOaCE £CIT. A Haubnndj Found, after Thirty Yean' Abicnee— KoconctllaUon and second Desertion. — A bill for divorce has been filed in by Catharine against John Spellmau which presents many, nunsnal features. The first peculiarity; is that the petition petition asks npt only for a divorce but an injunction to restrain the husband in the use of thir y thousand dollars worth of properly,.and a writ ol ne exeat re- publica, restraining him under .bonds to remain, in i his adopted state- Illinois. The greater peculiarity, is presented in the bill itswlf. .If the petition be true (and being under oath it is so to be considered) the case presents iu •brief the history of .several checkered lives. The bill alleges that the parties were married during the year 1830, at Megnglemuch, in the county of Mayo, Ireland. iThey lived together until some day in May, 1835.; The five years of their married life resulted in the birth of three children, Patrick P. Spellman, aged 35; Bridget Craig (wife of Owen Craig), now 34 years of age, and Michael Spellmnn, aged 32. years' About the time of the birth of: the last child it is charged that the defendant absconded from his native soil, taking his way to some land unknown to his family, two years after his wife received a letter letter from John, remitting to her twenty dollars. Eighteen months after she acknowledged the receipt of fifteen dollars accredited to the faithl^s John brother Patrick, was made from by the hand ot his This last remittance New York,. .It ;is charged in this connection that the respondent, having left his home aud 'three small children and .a wife, leaving but twenty dollars in money, and about fifty dollars' worth of furniture, the amount remitted was insufficient to the snpr. ort of the family. No further communication was had between the two branches of" the family until the -year 1856. In the year 1856 the deserted wife says she came to New York. She stayed there some time and migrated!to Philadelphia, as she claims in search of her husband and a livli- hood. She subsequently came to this country, »nd on the twelfth day of October, October, 1865, her .eldest son saw his father in the county of Stephenson, Illinois, ii wealthy farmer, with a second second wife and. a family of two children to assist him in the performance of his agricultural labors. The second wife is' charged to be one Sarah Austin, known as Sarah Spellman or' Mrs. Spelluian, and with her he is said to luivo lived twenty-eight years, two children having been the result of the bigamous connection. This discovery being made, a correspondence correspondence ensued between the parties interested iii the fust marriage and the violator : of the marital bond. It resulted resulted in his visiting Philadelphia, wnere lie met (as is charged) his wife, on the thirteenth duy of" January, 1866. He made protest of renewed 'affection—of it rivived love/ aud she alleges that, believing his protestations, she consented, on condi.ion that he would have, never niore, aught, to do with.Sarah Austin, to pardon him his delinquencies, aud receive him to husband's husband's share iu her affection auc home. A further moving reason to this condonement is alleged to be the fact that the defendant had property and the wife had none. Having re-united their fortunes the parties lived together after a gepara tion of over thirty years, for two score days, and then it is alleged, therespon dent proposed to return to his farm in Stephenson County, to close np hie affairs and sell off his property. Confiding Confiding in his integrity, his wife charges that she let him begone, and since that time she never saw "hide, nor hair" of him. She does charge, however, that her best information leads her to believe believe that he returned to Sarah Austin, known publicly as bis wife, and where she charges he committed adultery, and is now living iu violation of the law. a state of open The defendant in this case is represented represented to be a man of means. His estate estate is valued at $30,000. He is said to own a section and a quarter of cultivated cultivated land in Stepheason County, with almost any quantity of necessary farming farming utensils, cattle &c. The bill is supported by the affidavits of the two sons of the parties, and the injunction and writ both issued.