The New York herald., 1877-01-23
A NOVEL INJUNCTION.

=
THAT or MRS. TILToN-rHE HUSBAND, WHO
OBTAINS IT FROM THE WIFE, Is RESTRAINED
FROM USING 1T.
Interesting divorce case has to the surface
which, curiously enough, repeats q phase Of the
Beecher-Tilton trial, nasmuch as the wife has made
confession which she now claims to have signed under
moral coercion and owing to fraudulent representa-
tions while she was perfectly innocent The case in
question Is the suit for divorce brought by Mr. William
e. Calendar, wealthy real estate broker at No. IS
Pine street, against his wife, for adultery The parties
we're married in this city twelve years ago. and three
little daughters he eldest nine ana the youngest three
are the fruits OF the union. In October, 1874, the
family moved 70 Passac. N. j., and thero Mrs Callen-
dar still resides In tho same house with his father,
mother and maiden sister. while her husband lives In
New York In May, 1875, he brought IN the Supreme
Court the suit for divorce above referred TO- which
pending before q referee. Her answer denied she
crime charged, but as he proposes 10 Introduce
written confession signed by her she has now brought
action TO obtain an injunction torbiddina him TO
this document In any way. In this she has been
thus far successful Judge Donohus has granted the
injunction. The question OF law raised In this equity
suit in which she Is plaintiff and he defendant is q
novel one, and the husband now restrained from
using her confession, the genuineness OF which she
admits far a. the writing s concerned In the suit
against her.
SYNOPSIS OF COMPLAINT
The complaint of which the following is synopsis,
forth the facts OF the marriage &C., as given
above, and says that certain physician, Or. N,
visited Mrs Calendar, at Passac, N j., occasionally
for professional purposes and that on or about April
80 1875, Mr.. Calendar, while returning home with her
one evening from church socable, charged her with
CRIMINAL intimacy with her physician. subsequently
he frequently reiterated the charges the truth VI
which she continued 70 stubbornly deny. He then
made various threats 10 compel her to sign paper
her s among shr hnss he ssa
isas io1 ,hs'r Ssr' services, sas. Ssy
60 hotels and places Of il-repute company with
her physician. He represented TO her tnat could
fore be unable dispute anything which his detectives
might swear TO, and that all he would have 10 do 20
Obtain divorce against her would oe 70 bring suit
time she refused to sign confession, although he
threatened 10 obtain divorce from her in the man.
ner indicated above she dd not comply with hs do.
mand and then TO take her children from her and
abandon her entirely so that she would be utterly
ruined.
At the same time be promised that II she would sign
such confession no human being beside himself anu
the person who should draw up tho paper should ever
know H. and he would continue 10 live with her as
husband and wife, thus furnishing her proof OF the
strength and sincerity Of his love. She finally be.
came worn out and exhausted from Of sleep and
by the xieties OF mind through which she passed.
cetug O6VOteoly att8COeO 10
believing in the truth OF his representations, hs
the morning Of May I, 1875, at last consented 70
sign the confess,on' However However on tho follow.
and told him that she could not make up her mind
sign that paper He again urged her to do So saying
that II was the only thing which could savc her, kiss
ing her in apparently afectionate manner, and
surng her that II she would sign the confession he
would faithfully keep his promises TO her She then,
In reliance upon those promises agreed to sign the
paper She came to this city, and, IN company with
IN a>0 of htoa ho Vfoso
drawn up by person IN the oice and signed by her,
For four days subsequent TO the signing OF
the confession by her their marital relations
sented himself for few days. when she suddenly
received telegram asking her 70 come TO mis- Office in
New York. There he informed her that he was going
to for divorce on the ground OF adultery and she
then and there served with a summons and COM
paint In an action already begun by hm in the Su-
preme Court.
WHY SHE CONSENTED.
Mrs CALENDARS counsel 80 on TO- state that tho
charges and were denied in her but
that she has been In feeble health for several years
past Is OF an exceedingly nervous temperament and
er she was in a state Of great anxiety ana excite
nent. she ooniesses that she has but an
indistinct recollection Of what she said or
did during that period, and she mas no
recollection OF con Messing stating any one
that she had committed the crime On the contrary,
snc declared Immediately after signing tho conession
sion was lc. AS Callen action for divorce had
been referred Mr. George W. Parsons referee and
he proposed to introduce this confession, while she
dcbarrcd from appearing as witness IN her be-
hail. she pray cd the Court to grant an injunction per-
peually restraining him from using this confession in
any manner whatsoever. Then follow the confession
and an affidavit by Dr. N, In which he denied ever
committing an improperly with Mrs Collendar. On
the abovo showing Judge Donohue, as above stated.
granted the Injunction prayed for, which served
upon the descendant yesterday.