The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1869-10-02
"DIvORCE WITHOUT PUBLICITY" +"
A ScandalOus Anair-ElOpement of n Married
Iady-She Obtains n Divorce from Her Hus-
band and Marries with AnOther-HOw Such
Cases are Managed by the Lawyers.

band and Marries with AnOther-How Such
Cases are Managed by the Lawyers.
1t will be within the recollection OF our readers
that little more year ago some little public sensa
ton was created by the announcement that the wife
of citizen in respectable position in the community
had suddenly departed for Europe under the escort
of a gentleman called by the title OF "Colonel."
Gradually the circumstances were forgotton by
the public. The parties returned and went to
the house Of the gaants father, The wife obtained
divorce from her first husband and married the
Colonel According to the exact letter OF the public
advertisement in such cases, almost everything was
obtained without publicity" The case comes to
public notice again by an application before Judge
Clerke, in the Supreme Court Chambers, yesterday,
to set aside the decree on the grounds of fraud and
imposition. The following are the principal facts
subsequent to the commencement of the suit for d-
vorce by the Wife, as condensed from the orders and
a1idavs used on the moton-
In April, 1869, an action was commenced by Char
lOtte Il. Nichols to obtain divorce against her huS
band, Alexander II. j. Nichols, on the ground of
adultery, alleged to have been committed with an
unknown female at No. 80 Il. Twelfth street, in the
city of New York. on aflidavit OF one Oscar W.
Smith, that the defendant could not be found either
at his home or in the places he had been accustomed
to frequent, an order was issued by Judge Cardozo
directed the publication Of the summons NC, in the
New York WeekLy Ne,os and the Je,gish Messenger
once in each week for six weeks, and that it also be
mailed TO the defendant at Greenfield Conn.
No answer or appearance being put in by the de-
fendant Judge Barnard referred the case to William
Ii. Tracy. After the testimony was in, the referee
reported that on the Sth of May 1866, the parties
were married; that on the 10th of March, 1865, at
the house known as No. 80 Twelfth street, defen-
dant committed adulterywith some unknown woman,
as charged in the complaint, and that the plaintiff
was therefore entitled to a decree of divorce.
Before the referee, one Henry b. Harrison,
Who said he lived at the Compton
and Third avenue, in this city, and was real estate
agent doing business principally on the street. swore
that ne became acquainted with the parties to the
action and that on the 18th of March lie was stand
ing at stable in Twelfth street, west of University
place, about O'Clock in the afternoon, and saw the
defendant go into an assignation house opposite
accompanied by strange woman. On the 18th of
July, 1869, Judge Barnard made an order confirming
fhn raf md yran fhn nf
| divorce
Motion is now made to set aside the decree and all
proceedings had i'll the on the ground of fraud,
and allow the defendant to come in and defend the
| action. In support of the motion the defendant
swears that he resides at Greenfield Hill, Fairfield
county, State of Connecticut, and has there resided
since his infancy; that in 1867 he introduced to his
| wlle one EDWARD GeDhard, with wnOm he mad for
short time been acquainted and who at that time he
| supposed to be gentleman and a man of honor
that in 1865 the paintin eoped with this Gebhard
| and took passage to Europe; that 10y arrangement
| with the captain of the steamer, they left
ROt56Cat in voootn the British Ghanne1
on the continent they passed as man and wife, that
| they returned from Europe in january, 1869, and
took up their residence at schoharie N Y, in the
house of the father OF Gebhard; that plaintif pos
! sessed large property and Gebhard had nothing;
advertisement in the New York daily PAPERS, a
notice of the marriage OF the plainti with Gebhard
at schoharie, N Y. Defendant further swears that
| on inquiry he found that the decree of divorce
granted by Judge Barnard was produced before the
| Clergyman would celebrate the marriage, and that
| ings for divorce having been had; that at the
| time when plaintiffs witnesses swear he could
not be found, he had place OF business with his
brothers at No. Pine street in this city, which was
well known to paintii1. Defendant further swears
that all the statements made in the affidavit of Harr-
son. the chief witness for the plaintiff, ARE utterly false
In further support of the notion David j. Price, who
was in the employ of Orson A. House, attorney at
No. 7S Nassau street. from the fall of 1867 to the
middle of July, 1863, identified the Colonel by his
daguerreotype as the man who came to the office of
House to obtain a divorce for lady
from her husband, and identified in the
| same manner the lady who afterward called at
| in this actonG he further swore that he did not
swear to the affidavit purportng to be his atiidavit
| that he deposited copy of the summons and COM
| plant in the New ork Post ONCE, but that he
! merely signed the same; that such summons was
| never deposited to his knowledge; that the test-
| mony of Harrison the chief witness, is all in the
handwriting of House, the attorney for plaintiff
Gilbert b. Wood further swears that he had been in
formed by David j. Price that House, the attorney
in the habit OF using three different kinds of ink
in the preparation of papers in such cases. in order
| to show dssimilarity between the body of the
| papers and the signatures thereto Ehlngham H.
| Nichols swears that in conversation with him NJ. W.
Northrup who appears on the record attorney for
| plantf, admitted that he never had anything to do
! with the case, merely permitting his name to be used
by House (or Howes), and that he had no doubt the
| whole proceedings were a sham.
Judge Clerke granted the order setting aside the
| decree and all prior proceedings, at the same time
| remarkiDg that the matter must not stop here. He
l had known for some time of this House and OF his
! advertising; he thought it was time check should
be put such practices and would direct the papers
| to be sent before the Grand Jury.
| House made no appearance in opposition to the
| mOtiOu.-NeiC York Times,