
    The People, Respondent, v. Alvin H. Bliskey, Appellant.
    (County Court, Oneida County,
    October, 1897.)
    Disorderly person — Failure to support wife —Her adultery a defensei-
    Where a party is charged as a disorderly person, in failing to support his wife, he is entitled to show, as matter of defense, that she-has been guilty of adultery, and that, consequently, he was not obliged to support her.
    This is an appeal from a judgment of the Oity Court of Tltica, convicting the defendant of being a disorderly person in not supporting his wife. 1
    
      J. Frank Rogers, for appellant.
    F. H. Hazard, for respondent.
   Dunmore, J.

The defendant was convicted in the court below of being a disorderly, person in not supporting his wife, the complainant. The defendant attempted to show that the complainant had been unfaithful to her marriage vows, and that by reason of her-adultery he was not obliged to support her. All evidence tending to establish this defense was objected to by the People and excluded by the court. This was error for which the conviction of defendant must be reversed. People v. Brady, 13 Misc. Rep. 294; 34 N. Y. Supp. 1118; 2 Wait’s Law & Prac. 330; 2 Bish. Mar., Div. & Sep. (ed. 1891), § 1228; Culley v. Charman, 7. Q. B. Div. 89; Rex v. Flintan, 1 Barn. & Ad. 227; State v. Schweitzer, 57 Conn. 532; Carney v. State, 4 South. Rep. 285; 84 Ala. 7.

Judgment reversed.  