The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1883-07-08
MAJOR NICKERSON'S WIVES.
LENA CARTER's STORY GOLDMAN
AFFIDAVIT.
A Pitifui Tale OF Her woes-How She Wa.
wooed, Won, and Deceived.
TBy telegraph 10 the D,sn,,ch


WASHINGTON, July THE case Of En-.
ma G. ID. Nickerson against A. II. Nicker.
son, w. b. Matthews, and Lena Diller Car
ter Nickerson was before the Equity Court
To-day. In this case suit was brought for
the appointment OF a receiver TO take the
rents OF house No. Z, Dupont's Circle, and
LOT an injunction to prevent sale or other
disposition OF the property pending the
hearing. A temporary restraining order
had been issued, and the motion before the
Court to-day was whether this should be
dissolved or made perpetual.
Lena ID. Carter filed long affidavit in
answer to the original bill, accompanied
by aiiidavits OF several other persons cor
roborating the main allegations in her an
swer. She declares at the outset that from
March 31st, the last date on which the
Philadelphia court granted Nickerson the
divorce, until June 9th, when the divorce
was annulled, the complainant was not the
lawful wife OF Nickerson. She relates
how her mother rented portion OF Nick.
erson's house, Nickerson retaining two
rooms and boarding with the family. She
declares she never went out with him alone;
refers to the compliments charges that afii-
ant at various times between the 1st OF Sep
tember, 1882, and the Sd day Of April, 1885,
committed adultery with the defendant,
AZor III. Nickerson, and declares them will
fully and maliciously false, and says they
exhibit revengeiul malice on the part OF
the complainant toward the afliant who,
believing and confiding in the same man in
whom complainant believed and confided,
and with whom she lived for nearly ten
years, having in all that time trust, belief,
and confidence in him, has been equally
deceived with complainant by fraud and
deception practiced by Major Nickerson
on the af,iant us well as the complainant,
and ailiant has suffered, still suffers, and
during her whole life Will suffer more than
the complainant from fraud and deceit.
She relates the circumstances OF her mar
riage with Nickerson; that he showed her
certificate of the decree Of divorce, and
urged her to marry him Immediately, that
he was going West and she must marry
him at once, because when the divorce was
made public her family would never con-
sent to it. On April ., 1888, met Nickcr-
son at drugstore, went TO Baltimore, and
were married. As soon as the alliant be-
came convinced that there was doubt as
to the propriety or legality OF the divorce
proceedings, she informed Nickerson
they must separate until the matter was de-
cided by the court, and il the court
declared the divorce proceedings irregular,
the separation must be final. On the 30th
Of May last he removed his trunks from
the house, and has not stayed in the house
since. The afliant again denies the charges
OF adultery. She relates the circumstances
of the transfer Of property to her. and adj
mts that she was most improvident and in
discreet, and acted improperly in con-
senting to marry NickersOn so soon
after her divorce and without the
knowledge of her family; that she ac-
cepted the property in good faith, because,
being married in good faith, he was moral
ly, if not legally, bound to provide for her;
that it was n small step toward reparatiOn
for the injury he had done her, and be-
cause she was advised, and is still advised,
that the complainant had, and has, no right
therein. She again denies having been
guilty of adultery. and submits that it Is
enough that her whole life has been
blighted, her peace destroyed, ana
she and her family made wretched;
that at the time when she was watching the
last moments OF q dying sister the COM
plainant and her friends were spreading
broadcast through the public press SLAM
ders and fasehoods against her. She fur
Their submits that il Nlckerson was able TO
deceive a person Of the mature age OF the
complainant, who had lived with him as
his wife for ten years; il he was able to
deceive his counsel in Philadelphia, was it
strange or improbable that he could and
did deceive the affiant, who is young
enough to be his daughter?
The argument will be heard Monday.