
    Stanford vs. Stanford.
    A wife is entitled to temporary alimony up to a final decree, notwithstanding a jury upon a feigned issue has given a verdict of adultery against her.
    It is a serious question how far a husband, who marries after a feigned issue and before a decree, can have any benefit of a Verdict of adultery given against the wife.
    
      March 12, 1832.
    The bill in this cause was filed by a husband for a divorce a vinculo matrimonii. A feigned issue had been awarded; and the jury found the wife guilty of adultery. No-decree had been made upon the coming in of the issue and postea: but the complainant, after the verdict, married again.
    An application was now made for arrears of temporary alimony.
    Mr. William Mitchell, for the defendant.
    Mr. Frederick A. Tallmadge, for the complainant.
   The Vice-Chancellor.

I see no reason for withholding the temporary alimony. The case of Loveden v. Loveden, 1 Phillimore’s Eccles. R. 203, is in point. There, alimony was given from the date of sentence and appeal. And this case :has been considered as authority by Chancellor Walworth: Germond v. Germond, 1 Paige’s C. R. 83.

There is a singular' feature hi this cause. The husband, it appears, married again after the jury had found the wife guilty .9Í adultery: but prior to any decree. What the effect of this conduct may have upon his right to a divorce, when he shall move for a decree upon the verdict, I will not now say; but, in the mean time, I cannot forbear expressing a serious doubt how far ^e can have any relief under it. The English ecclesiastical authorities prove the force of this observation.

Order for payment of temporary alimony and arrears.  