
    Henry L. Kock vs. Bianca C. Kock.
    Formerly it was usual to grant alimony, and counsel fees, in all actions for divorce, brought by a husband against his wife; but of late the rule has been relaxed, and an allowance will not be made where it appears from the affidavits that the defendant lived a life of prostitution before her marriage ; that the plaintiff married her in the belief that she was a virtuous female ; and that she has been guilty of repeated adulteries, since the marriage, and has deserted him and is living with relatives who are able and willing to support her.
    rpHE defendant made a motion for alimony during the pen--L dency of an action of divorce against her by her husband and for counsel fees to conduct her defense, stating that she had employed Messrs. William C. Traphagan and James T. Brady as her counsel, and that the plaintiff was a man of wealth and leisure, living at the rate of $5000 per annum. The plaintiff, in opposition to the motion, read affidavits by which it appeared that he first became acquainted with the defendant on the 11th March, 1863, without the usual introduction, and was married to her on the 8th of April, 1863. The plaintiff further alleged that she committed adultery with a gentleman of the city of New York on the 23d, 24th, 25th, 26th and 27th days of May, 1864, and that the plaintiff had sued her for her adulteries, stating the places with great particularity. The plaintiff also alleged that the defendant, immediately after his acquaintance with her, introduced him to Mr. and Mrs. F., of Staten Island; Mr. F. being a brother-in-law and his wife a sister of the defendant ; that they vouched for the purity of the defendant and urged the plaintiff’s .immediate marriage with her. The plaintiff begged her to defer it, whereupon she threatened to commit suicide, and at last he yielded, and they were married within a month of their acquaintance. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant in May last proposed to a gentleman, a former acquaintance of her’s, to go on a spree with her, and on the 23d of May, 1864, she left the plaintiff without his consent and went to Boston via Springfield, and remained there several days, the gentleman in question having been seen in her apartment at a late hour at night, he paying all the bills and advancing her $50. The plaintiff states that Mrs. F. had full knowledge of the trip in question, she having accompanied her sister to the depot and was present at their departure, and that the defendant shortly after deserted him, and went to live with Mr. and Mrs. F., who he alleges are able and willing to support her. Two letters of Mrs. F/s were read on the motion; one was addressed to the plaintiff in which she denies knowing anything of her whereabouts, and the other was addressed to her sister, the defendant, in which she refers to her trip to Boston and says, “dream of your strawberry festival,” “next time we will have cold cuts at all hours if we can,” slang phrases, the plaintiff alleges, well known to the initiated.
    The plaintiff alleged that he had been grossly deceived by the defendant, who pretended to be a virgin living a virtuous life, and by Mr. and Mrs. F. who urged his marriage; that the defendant was a ballet girl in the New Bowery and other theatres in New York, under the name of Miss-, and had lived a life of prostitution for years past, all of which Mr. and Mrs. F. concealed from him.
    [New Yoke Special Tebm,
    October 3,1864.
    . W. O. Traphagan, for the motion. ,
    
      O. Bainbridge Smith, opposed.
   Clebkb, J.

said: Formerly it was usual to grant alimony and counsel tees in all actions for divorce brought by the husband against his wife, but of late the rule had been relaxed, and that it would be an outrage to grant an allowance in such a case as this.

Motion denied.

Clerke, Justice.]  