New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1881-11-22
RICH BUT VERY UNHAPPY.


! Judgment on August 1S. 1881, in proceeding be-
gun in the preceding May by Maltide Stern against
| Edward Stern a director Of the Municipal Gasllght
| Company Of this city, for a temporary divorce
! according to which she was granted a SEPARATION
the custody of the children of tho marriage, and an
| allowance Of 1000 francs month for eighteen
months and 900 francs for her expenses in coming
| to America, provided she should begin WITHIN
eighteen months a suit for an absolute divorce IN
| the courts of New-York. Mr.. Stern appeared by
attorney in the proceeding before the French m
| bunal and the case excited much interest at the
! time in Paris
Tho summons and the complaint in q suit begun IN
the Supreme Court of New-Yorll by Mr.. Stern
against his wife for limited divorce on the ground
of abandonment and for the custody of the children
were received through the post by Mrs. Stern ten
days after she had her decree in the Paris suit.
Mr.. Stern in his complaint says that he married on
May 30, 1877, the defend lt whose maiden name
was Maltide Philomene Dreulhet. They lived hap
PLY together until about May %. 1881, when Mrs.
Stern left her husbands home at No. Rue Bayar'
Paris taking her two children with her.
Mr.. Stern also asserts that his wife Is not
q fit person to have the custody of children,
Mrs. Stern put in answer to the complainant
which she says that she left her husbands home on
account OF his cruel treatment of her and asserts
her in continuing to live apart from him, and also
entities her to the custody of the children. Mrs.
Stern also BEGAN a few weeks AGO an action against
her husband for an absolute divorce and alimony,
on the ground of infdelity-to the complaint in
which Mr. Stern opposed an answer denying the
charges Mrs. Stern declares she has no means to
support herself and children. and that her husband
is worth 81 900 900, and has an income of 100000
a year
Mr. Stern offered to discontinue the suit brought
by himself and rendered to Mrs. Stcru's attorney
the legal costs which had already accrued on IT.
Mrs. Stern refused to allow the suit to he discon-
tinued without the payment. not only of the costs
but also 4 reasonable sum as counsel fee. Applica-
ton was therefore made the Court on both sides,
the one for an order com rclng Mr. stern
to paw counsel fees, aud the other for
permission to discontinue his suit without
50 doing. The question argued yesterday
before Justice Donuhoe in the Supreme Court, Cham
hers who reserved his decision. At the same time
an application made in behalf Of Mr.. stern Tor per
mission 20 visit hs children. was heard. This ap
plCatiOn was based on an affidavit by Mr.. Stern, IN
which Inc SAYS n is un'rur, as intimated by MIS-.
Sterns attonev,t that he Stern made his visit to
his children the occasion of violence or abuse, that
several OF these visits were made IN the absence OF
Mrs Stern and that several other occasions Mrs.
stern insisted upon remaining IN the room ana
making offensive rcmarks 20 depOncnt, although he
requested 10 be left alone with his children"
Mrs. Stern IN her affidavit in opposition to tho
motion declares that -he left her husbands house
and went 10 1--we with her mother. being compelled
to do 50 by the cruel, inhunan and wicked treat
ment she experienced from her husband, which rem
dcrcd her life unsafe and account of tho kuOWl-
edge shr Obtained OF his numerous acts OF lnhdrly
with various women both IN this country and m
Europe, extending over most Of their married ie.
She reclteS The proceedings III the fariS sur ana
says that Guring the pending Of II her husband was
allowed 10 visit his children three times week.
There are two children OF the marriage living
younger girl OF about two years of age. II H. also
declared that such was tho regard of her husband
for the honor Of the boy Edward that he repeatedly
alleged in Paris during the proceedings there that
said child was born January - 1877. year earlier !
than tn, rue date Of MS birth and four months be-
fore the marriage 81 the parents and THIS ia"ehoud
50 disuOnOT to he dcpOreut a. wife ana ~ de-
grading 10 The child, he repeated IN th" complaint
in the suit brought by him Tor separation, and al
though the true ia public record IN this city
he has not corrected the untrue statement |
i'm In. action. Ills complaint il on hlo in |
his court and he has moved 10 discon- |
tinuc the action leaving the false dale 10 |
stand uuCOrraCcd therein nOtwii anding the fact
that his attention has been called TO the matter
more than once IL is further said that the boy |
Edward peculiar in temper and disposition, haY-
ing been rendered 50 by he III treatment and brutal
conduct 81 nurse III lhfiA Wbcn me in"lh'r WIS /
III OF a miscarriage OF twi +, (which was very /
largely caused by the ill-treaiment of dcPoncnt |
Mrs. STERN by her husband On the day 81 tho |
funeral of the twins, MIR Stern absontrd himself /
and was out in the Bots de Bouoguc with women OF
bad reputation Mrs. Stern, upon her partial IL
and entreated her husband 10 have |
her discharged, frequently pointing ont to |
bin the mus : crne and negligent conduct toward |
the child. lie refused absolutely TO discharge the
nurse aud insisted IN bringing her 10 America, Tor
the very rca-Ou tod Dy himself, that she wa,
dIstlstclul To dcpouCnt' Alrs stern also says that
her husband has conceived dislike and disgust for
the boy, and oton calls him an IDIOT, aud brute"
She ha, seen him push and kick away the boy |
when he advanced toward the father she had also |
seen HIM whip the boy IN a brutal manner |
with a hoTsc-whp. when the child Charlotte was |
Ill last spring aud was pronounced by the aoctofsto
be in critical state, Mr.. 81 -rH remained away AT
spa and never came once 10 visit hrr although !
daily advised OF the progress of the disease |
aud the imUnincucr OF dcath.'
While the children were in the custody of Mrs |
Stern, under the Paris decree. Mr.. stern called 1
from time u time to them and on these orca- |
sions always asked for his wife. who refused 10 see
him. lie, however, induced her, the day before lis
departure Tor spa 10 come into the room ia order 60
receive sOnc important communication, when lac |
began TO tmnt her about money, TO speak dir |
paragingiy OF her father aud mother. Ill the time |
speaking a loud zone and getting INTO q rage un-
III, finally he pulled from his pocket huge roll of
faces. and said he would her and her |
children siaryc before he would give |
them a cent On MIR. storms return from Spa. he
called to see his children, and, when Mrs. stem |
came into the ROOM began to abuse her and curse
her and call her names and 20 abuse her parents,
fol owing her from room 10 room until she was
Obliged To call in her father to project her" Mr..
Stern occupied the most OF his TIME when visiting |
his children IN abusing has wife and her parents IN
loud tones
On one occasion he began " 10 curse her and in the
violent excess OF his rage tainted away "a
another occasion he became so violent, gcSticuatcd
so wildly AMI uttered such dlro threats of murder
and other bodily injuries that Mrs. stern was
Obliged to call through the house for assistance
and the concierge came up Stai,s and sent Tor
the police Mrs. Stern says she was a Roman
Catholic but was married m a Lutheran church nj
Mr. Sterns request. Mr. Stern was OF Jewish birth.
and Mrs. Stern was informed and believed that lac
his original Jewish religion through
some supposed social aIydntage.' In reference TO
Father BjeTng, priest of tle RUSSIAN Chapel who
had offered his pastoral residence rs u place for Mr.
Stern to visit MS children letter from whom -
offered by Mir Stern in support of his application to
see the children, Mrs Stern says she knows nothing,
except that she had frequently heard her husband
call him - a scOmdre aud a rascal and when the |
father called upon him refused 10 see HIM, crying
out into the hall that he was not at home TO see thc