Supreme Court of Appeals (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1896 edition. Excerpt: ...to counsel fees and to alimony, has been relaxed, and now neither is granted unless the facts in the case justify it. The plaintiff accepted pro vision made for her support by the defendant, and without making any restitution or offer to restore to the defendant the money which she has heretofore received from him in pursuance of the agreement of separation, she now, when he becomes unable to continue to make payments to her, casts herself upon him for to support and maintain without any pretense that she is not as well able to support herself as her husband is able to support her. Carpenter r. Carpenter, supra. Fifth Point.--The Court should not order the defendant to do or to pay what he cannot do or pay. The present is not the past. It is not a question as to what the defendant once could have done, but what he now has the ability to do. The whole testimony shows his absolute lack of means, of business and of income. He is in debt. He cannot pay his board, though ostensibly living well, yet, as clearly appears, upon trust through the friendship of those to whom he has paid money in the past. He spends nothing besides his board and his office rent. He has completed the contract for building the railroad, and has no interest whatever therein. IIis revenue from this, which enabled him to do so much for the plaintiff, is gone. He is without business. A railroad contractor, he has no contract or pending contract. The fact that he paid his wife's support so long as able is evidence that not now paying it is because of his inability to do so. That he is poor is shown by his pawn tickets (fol. 89), everyone of which represents a pawn made at the time when he was paying the plaintiif to the best of his ability, the last pawn having been made on...