The Evening critic. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1881-1885, 1882-11-21
THE SEVENTH COMMANDMENT.
How ~ was violated by saIiic u.
Kinehart ana Norman wbiteiOch-
A suit for Divorce, ana whnt Mr.
Riuclinrt Alleges in His Petition.

HOW " was NfOIated Dy ssNittc
Einchart ana Norman yvbiteIOok--
A suit for Divorce, nnd what Mr.
Rinciiart Alleges in His Petition.
Charles Rinehart to-day nled his application
for divorce from tho bonds Of matrlmony with
salllo Il. Rnehart. Mr. VIM. +. Mattlngly Is
the complainants solicitor, and tho petition
sets forth that tho defendants maiden namo
was sallio E. Currier. Mr.. Rlnehart has been
o resident OF this city since February, 1852,
and married the defendant at the residence of
Rev. i. X. Ward, on q, near Fourteenth street
northwest, May o, 1882, and lived ut the
Howard House since that tlmc until Novem'
Der z, 1882. On September last, while on
visit 10 Philadelphia, Mr.. Rinohart was taken
sick and the next day returned to his hotel IN
this city, whero he was confined to his bod
with an attack OF tho typhoid fever until No
vember z.
During the last week OF his sickness he
learned that on July %. 1882, his wife COM
mitted adultery In the city Of Baltimore, Nd,
with Norman whltolock, OF Port Deposit, Nd,
OF which place Mrs. Rlnohart was ono tlmo a
resident. Mr.. Rinehart In proof of this
charge, states that he has come In possession
Of a letter written by his wife 10 Mr.. White
lock when she was on visit to Port Deposit
and mailed from HGvro dc Gracc, In which
she writes OF
How Near They Came TO Being
Caught;
Of how she had lied to and fooled her husband;
OF hor love for Whltelock; of having slept with
him tho previous night; referred to herself rs
whitclocks wifo, and signed the letter 8. Il.
Miller, which name whitelock sometimes as.
sumcd.
Shortly after Mr.. Rlnehart returned from
Philadelphia, on September 10 last, Mr.Whlte.
lock came 10 this city and, with the exception
OF n few days remained until after Mr.. Rlno-
hart left, on November z, and stopped Mt the
st. James Hotel, or opposite, nt the Howard
House. During tho time MIR. Rlnehart was III
he charges that Mr.. Whltelock and his wife
were almost constantly together, a portion of
the time he occupying n room In the Howard
Houee Immediately adjoining hers with
A Communicating Door between,
the room occupied by Mr.. Rinohart boing
across the hall from that OF his wife.
Mr.. Whltelock and Mrs. Rlnohort frequently
took their meals together, either at tho public
table or IN their rooms TOOK daily Walks , and
together. The husband says that during this
entire period his wife neglected him In his
Illness, devoted herself TO Mr.. Whltelock and
lived In adultery with him, and their conduct
was such that IL became tho common talk OF
the servants and occupants of the house.
He charges specially that
MRS. Rinehart Committed Adultery
with MIR. WhiteIOck
daily from September 90 to October 8, 1882, at
the Howard House: that sho did likewise on
the night Of October q, but the precise place
he is unable to state, but believes II was at tho
st. james Hotel, and at tho Howard House on
October IL, 10 and 10; also divers times be-
tween October 23 and November D, and on
November O.
Rinohart, since their marriage, has, from time
to time, furnished Mr.. Whitolock with sums Of
money and articles of clothing. Mr.. Rlnohart
says that he returned TO Port Deposit Md,
on November Z to recuperato his health, ana
left
His wife and MFR. Wbitelocx To.
gether Mt the Howard House.
They left on November s nominalIy for Now
York, but in reality went TO Port Deposit. Left
there the same evening, stopped together that
night In the city OF Baltimore, and returned to
this city and the Howard House on November
8. In consequence OF their conduct they were
ordered to leave the hotel, and on November
IL went to the fremont House, where they
have since been stopping together.