New York Court of Appeals October 8, 1889 (Moller v. . Moller)

Earl, J.

We agree with the learned judges of the General Term in their low estimate of the value in divorce cases of the evidence of ¡Di’ostitutes and jnivate detectives. The courts ' have come to regard the uncorroborated evidence of such witnesses as insufficient to break the bonds of matrimony.

(Sopwith

v.

Sopwith,

4 Sw.

&

Tr. 246;

Ginger

v.

Ginger,

L. R., 1 P. & D. 38;

Banta

v.

Banta,

3 Edw.