case porter case a wife separate a month et thoro causan adultery well rage be  within the exception of the James c against bigamy although the word divorce  be not insert in the decree hale Inst sum Kely   light burn e l Com dig Com  dig hawk p c porter be indict on the statute James c h for that she be lawful  marry to porter and he then live and she well know thereof felon espouse one  rook contra form to cause to stand croak car upon not guilty plead a special  verdict be find that she be lawful espouse to the say porter and that before  sir John lamb judge of the court of audience she have sue a divorce from the  say porter near rage where upon prosecution it be decree quod near rage of her  say husband towards her she shall be separate a month et thoro from her say  husband but no word of divorciamus be therein and it be express intimate in  the sentence that she shall not marry to any other during the life of the say  porter and this sentence be find in haec word and that afterward within six  month the say porter live and she know thereof espouse the say rook and if she  be guilty of the felonious marry of a second husband against the form of the  statute they pray the discretion of the court Germin for the king argue at the  bar that it be felony within the statute for she be direct within the word of  the body of the Act she be marry to one man and he be alive and she know  thereof marry to another and the proviso shall not aid her for that do not  extend but only to person which be divorce by sentence in the spiritual court  but here be not any sentence of divorce but only a separation from her husband  a month et thoro which be only a liberty to live from he and a provision only  for her safety that she shall not live with he to avoid his misuse of her by  his cruelty and there be not one word of divorciamus in the sentence as there  be in every case of divorce therefore she be out of the proviso and this be  none of the divorce mention Edward folio ultimo where it be find that there be  but five divorce videlicet causan declaration causan praecontractus a causan  bloodrelationship causan relation by marriage and causan firigiditatis and  this divorce be none of they and the proviso do not intend but when there be a  sentence of a absolute divorce holbourn and Grimston for the defendant argue  strong to the contrary for it be a penal law concern life and therefore ought  to be favourable expound in favor vitae and that the proviso extend to this  kind of divorce for there be divorce ex causan precedent as in the case of  divorce cite which he not proper divorce but rather sentence of nullify the  marriage which be not intend in the proviso for such a marriage be void of  itself and by the sentence declaration be make that it be void ab beginning  and so it be where marriage be infra aged nubile and such divorce be declare  null and by such divorce the party be free a chain marriage but there be  divorce ex causan subsequent as causan adultery which in the intention of some  be a absolute divorce and that the party innocent may marry again but other  conceive that it be no absolute divorce but only a separation a month et thoro  and free the party from the performance of conjugal duty only the one with the  other for although in former time it be question whether such party divorce  may marry again yet now it be make clear by the canon that they may not and to  avoid this question principal this proviso be add in the statute that where  sentence of divorce be give such person marry shall not be in danger to be  felon by this statute by the same reason in this case there be a sentence  croak car of divorce although it do not dissolve party a chain marriage yet a  a say quaere see the Edward c Elizabeth c and the marriage Act Geo c croak car  er p ignorant woman can know that distinction but they conceive when there be  a sentence of divorce that they be out of the statute and although there be no  such word as divorciamus in the sentence yet there be to disjoin and the word  divorciamus be not usual but to disjoin and   light show what divorce be a  chain marriage which be the divorce before cite in Edward pl which be cause  precedent the marriage and by such divorce the issue be make a bastard and  thereby declare that they be riot justae marriage but divorce causan adultery  be no dissolution a chain but only a month et thoro and therefore the  coverture continue betwixt they and to that purpose the case be cite of  Stevens v totty a where the husband after such divorce causan adultery release  a obligation make to his wife before the coverture and it be adjudge a good  release which prove that the marriage continue and one Stowels case b that the  wife after such divorce shall have dower of her husband land which prove that  the espousal continue betwixt they but a divorce causan rage be ground ex jure  nature and be ill the same manner and nature as a divorce causan adultery and  the proviso in the statute be that the party divorce by sentence if be take  another wife or the wife take another husband shall not be within the danger  of the statute and this extend to every manner of sentence of divorce and not  to any particular cause of divorce and so conclude that she be within the  proviso of the say statute and so not guilty of the felony but the court much  doubt whether she be within that proviso and if this shall be suffer many will  be divorce upon such pretence and instant marry again whereby many  inconvenience will ensue whereupon she be advice not to insist upon the law  but to procure a pardon to avoid the danger for it be clear agree by all the  civilian and other that this second marriage be unlawful and that she may be  in danger to be adjudge a felon by this statute croak car trinity term car in  the king bench sir John Brampston Knt chief justice sir William Jones Knt sir  George croak Knt sir Robert Berkley Knt justice sir John bank Knt attorney  general sir Edward Littleton Knt solicitor general