
    Margaret Heatherwick v. James Heatherwick.
    County Court of Grundy county—its jurisdiction. The County Court of Grundy county has no jurisdiction of a suit for a divorce.
    Writ or Error to the County Court of 'Grundy county; the Hon. Colquhotot Grant, Judge, presiding.
    This was a suit in chancery instituted in the court below by James Heatherwick against his wife, Margaret, praying for a divorce. Such proceedings were had in that court that a decree for a divorce was granted. Thereupon the defendant below sued out this writ of error, and now insists that the County Court of Grundy county had no jurisdiction of the subject matter of the suit.
    Messrs. Irwin and Snowhook, for the plaintiff in error;
    cited act of Feb. 15, 1855, Sess. Acts, p. 160; and act of Feb. 27, 1854, Sess. Acts, p. 239.
    Messrs. Lelands and Blanchard, for the defendant in error.
   Mr. Chief Justice Caton

delivered the opinion of the Court:

The only question in this case is, had the County Court jurisdiction to grant this divorce. The statute confers jurisdiction upon the County Court “in all civil cases, suits and actions and proceedings when the amount due and claimed, or the value of the property, shall not exceed the sum of $1,000.” 'This, we think, very clearly refers to proceedings of a pecuniary character, .where money is due or claimed, or where the title to property is in controversy. Such is not the character of a proceeding for divorce. Incidentally, pecuniary considerations may arise, but the primary object' of the suit is not pecuniary, and very often no pecuniary questions arise.'

The decree is reversed and the bill dismissed.

Decree reversed.  