The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1878-07-25
Matrimonial Ventures of a Divorced
Wife and a WidOwer.
THE MEDDLESOME MOTHER-IN-LAW
A Two-Sided Story that Points
a Single Moral.

The parties were married In 1874 shortly previous
their marriage she had obtained divorce from her
former husband, Albert D. Brown. Mr.. Stobo was
widower when he married the plaintiff voluminous
anaaavts were made on both sides, followed by
lengthy arguments Of the respective counsel MIRA
stobo being represented BY Msssrs. Daily Perry
and Mr. stobo by Aessrs. Arthur Phelps, Knevals
Ransom
xRs. sroBo's STORY.
First In order came the story OF Mrs. stobo. Alter
stating the date OF her marriage to the defendant and
charging adulteries on his part with various women,
she deniss most emphatically counter charge Of
adultery aud enteFs upon detailed recital of her
married lie with the defendant She states that at
the time OF ner marriage she was possessed of some
5000 in her own right, which money. upon the So
licitaIion OF her husband, she handed to him,
and he expended the same for his own personal
and pleasures, refusing to return TO her any
portion Of H. even provide her with
necessary clothing. She alleges further that
her husband was addicted TO the use Of sbloroform
large quantities. that her proteslations against It's
use were OF avail; that frequently, while under
the influence, he would annoy and abuse her. and at
upsesmiy hours OF the night frequently call her
out OF bed and point out TO her imaginary AMI
mails. All this, she says wore upon her seriously,
making her nervous and debilitsted. The story OF
her troubles aid not end here she says that she
70 come home; that although she received him
kindly he would insult and curse her. and that
on one occasion he won't SO far as to tell her
that he swoud make tn house damned hot that she
could not live with him'' Upon her stating the facts
OF her physician she says no told her that
she must get away from her husband If she placed any
value on her lite. Finding that she could
longer stand the abusive treatment OF her hus-
band she left him ON the 29sh Of March last
and took up her abode at the residence
OF her parents, 1t No 236 Ninth street, Brooklyn,
where she has ever since resided Further on In her
petition she alleges since thar marriage her
band given Der cent for her own personal
use or pleasure; that he has never bought her any
clothing, aod that all he has paid her
count was her board and washing bills Closing her
statement is the allegation that she Is nrsy dos
titute and has not money even to pay car fare.
DENIES SOFT IMPEACHMENT.
Mr. Samuel D. Ol,phsnt, designated in the defend
ants papers ss General Oliphant, with whom Mrs
Stobo il charged with adultery, makes state
mens denying tho charge. He says he first became
acquainted with tho pisnti in 1870 solicitor for
the borough OF Princeton, N, J., in suit brought BY
her against her nrst husband .or maintenance, and
that he subsequently was her counsel in SUIT for
divorce against her nrst husband, which resulted
IN q decree In her favor. He says he has
occasionally met her s,ace and exchanged let
tors Of a social and business nature He
further that sh orty alter the divorce ne her
check for money belonging 10 her. which check she
handed to her husband no adds that ME- Stobo on
one occasion asked MIN write com unication to
the New York papers correcting statements made IN
various New Jersey papers In regard 10 the SUIT Tor
ports made appear that suit brought by him
instead OF by her. He concludes his anidavii with
the settlement that Mr.. Stobo once asked him 10 be-
come his security the rent Of a store, which re-
quest no courteously but firmly declined
sToBo SAYS
The story Of Mr. Stobo 10 equally curious, but more
specInc it's detas He says he Introduced to the
plaintiff by her iaher III August 1871 no being then
che mcas Al that time the plaintiff was living sep
from her nrst husband, pending the deter NINA
THIS divorce suit, he says, concealed IRON
him, and meantime no became very intimate with
Orange. n j., twice a week. He brought Iis lutte
boy then i've years old TO tne house, ana she often
dear little orphan ooy.n During that lime tnere
was no engagement OF marriage, though the
The plaintiff was an ardent, attractive woman, and
his attentions TO her were very devoted In
May, 1877, ne again took his boy 10 her mousse ana
alter a time became very much depressed and
| began TO cry. He asked her what was the matter,
| aud she said she was thinking OF her dead baby
bured In Peters Field ut Princeton without stone
| 10 marx his last resting place she added that as
soon rs she 60! through with nsr SUIT she would re-
SURPRISE.
.wha. are you talking aoou'f" no asked "whas
| is the euity"
NJ nave com meneed PROCEEDINGS for divorce against
| my husband" sue Answe cred, switch expect will
soon be decided III my favor, and shall get money"
| She was almost in Mysteries, defendant goes to
| state; much so that she was unable 10 give him
these iurinsr de.aa A. a subsequen. interview
told him the story, and on MS asking why she had
not told before, said she afraid that II he
knew / he would not come 10 see hor Despite all
TINS being very attached to her, he continued
mis- visis. Iu October following they wore ngaged
TO be married and shortly ai,erward wore msrred by
| Rev. Henry Ward Beccher.
|
He says shat he ,ola her he had money, and In
point OF TACT dd not have money enough 10 buy the
wedding ring, confession on bis part thai uced
her to give him the weading ring gwen ner by her
first husband, Brown, winch he exchanged for new
| rHw IRRsrREssIBLH xornERS-LAw
| His wifes mother never became reconcIlsd to the
| tsrizng him ''5cotcn bcggar" He does
| drop The mothcr-inaw here. He says That she con-
about hun and altogether rendered the lives OF him.
| sell anu wife burdens TO them. II was u constant
threat Of the mother that she would separate
| them, aud sue finally succeeded the 24th OF
March last He went 10 his business that morning.
usual and on returning discovered that hrs wife bad
except his wearing apparel. No message was left Tor
him, and no afterward learned that she mad gono
| away with her mother. He has not seen her since
''Tne next proceeding" hrs affidavit continues "was
| the commencement Of this SUIT, which Is
wilnou, ioundallon in TACT, aud before Heaven /
swear thai anu innocent o the charges In the com
plant contained and believe the to be but the OF.
spring OF morbdly jealous mind made more jealous
by the insidious dovsh SANDERS and suggestions Of
plaintiffs mother Tho counter charges VI adultery
up w me In my answer believe 10 be true, and,
much as I regret the publicity OF the secrets
| o. my married lie with plaintiff ana the
| exposure OF her faults aud frailLles, the course
| adopted by her under the advice and iunu-
| ence, as nrmy believe, OF her mother, am CON-
| psed In justice 10 myself, my sisters and my boy,
to open wide tho door, tnat the court may perceive
the precise situation, aud thus having iul Knowl-
edge OF The merits Of tins unhappy controversy may
| be luiy able " mcte out even justice
| NOT wHskKYs FOR TWO.
| On his return home ono occasion, at eleven +.
NJ, defendant says that his vile told him the SOON
orai' tmsanng Mr.. Onphanp had just gone and left
drink for him. and he adds 'rhat they had been drink
ing was evident IRON the pungent lumes OF tho wins
key and the little Tin kettle stu stsaming" He did
| not think there any wrong AT the time, but
| subsequent Inquiries at their various boarding
| houses developed the Information that OIiphant
frequently called mis- vile In his abscnce that she
almost always received MIN In their sleeping room ;
| that they nearly always had drinks together, aud
that she frequently went out with the evening
BEwIIDERfSG CONFESSION.