
    Baker vs. The People.
    Notwithstanding the provision in 2 R. S. 573, § 8, subd. 3, it is no defence to an indictment for bigamy that, subsequently to the second marriage, the first had been dissolved by the decree of a competent court for some cause other than the adultery of the defendant.
    Otherwise, if such a decree be obtained prior to the second marriage.
    Error from the oyer and terminer of Washington county, where Baker was convicted of bigamy. The indictment charged the unlawful marriage as having 'taken place May 1st, 1838. Plea, that before the marriage of May 1st, the prisoner’s first wife had been guilty of adultery; and that after that marriage, he had obtained a divorce. Demurrer and joinder. After judgment in the court below, Baker sued out a writ of error.
    
      J. Crary, for the plaintiff in error,
    relied on the words of 2 JR. S. 573,2d ed. § 8, sub. 3, which provides, that the statute of bigamy shall not extend “ to any person by reason of any former marriage which shall have been dissolved by the decree of a competent court for some cause other than the adultery of such person.”
    
      C. L. Allen, (district attorney,) contra,
    
    was stopped by the court.
   The Court were clear, that the subdivision relied upon contemplated a divorce prior to the second marriage, and should be so read.

Judgment affirmed.  