
    Lewis against Lewis.
    
      October 5th.
    
    On a bill, by a husband, for a divorce, the wife will not be allowed alimony, nor will the court, on her motion, order the husband to advance money to enable her to defend the suit, until she has by her answer, disclosed the nature of her defence,
    BILL by the husband for a divorce.
    
      Burr, for the defendant,
    on petition by her, moved for an order on the husband for alimony, and for the advance of money requisite to enable her to make her defence., She stated, that she had three children, and had lived separate and apart from the plaintiff since 1806, and charged him with cruel usage and with adultery. She had entered her appearance to the suit this day.
   The Chancellor

denied both parts of the motion. He said, that it was necessary that the wife should previously disclose, by her answer, the nature of her defence; for as yet it did not appear whether she intended to defend herself against the charge in the bill. And until the facts in the bill were put in issue, he did not incline to allow her alimony; especially considering the long previous separation of the parties, and that she had not stated that she stood in need of any allowance.

Motion denied, 
      
       Vide Mix v. Mix, 1 Johns, Ch. Rep. 108. Denton v. Denton, id. 364.
     