New-York tribune., 1884-01-04
THE COURTS.
QUEER MARRIAGE COMPLICATIONS.
Mr.. BARLow's RELATIONS WITH MRS. BARLOW OR
COTrRELL.

The plaintiff in the suit of Garfield F. Barlow
for annulment of his marriage with Emma J. Barlow,
on the ground that she had husband living when be
court Judge Van HOesen yesterday refused 10 vaoste
the order Of arrest The suit for annuIment begun
over year ago. In his affidavit Mr. Barlow asserts that
the defendant and himself marrsd october 10,
1879 by the Rev. George G. HOughton, ~ Hoboken, NJ
J. They lived together until November %, 1880 when
the plaintiff left his wife, having discovered that she had
been married on September T. 1870, to Thomas W. Cot
tre and that the marriage ceremony was performed by
the Rev. Charles F. Deems. COttre at the time OF the
marriage OF the plaintiff was living and not divorced Mr.
The defendant in her admits her marriage 10
the plaintiff IN October 1879 She states that they lived
together until November 7, $780, when the alleged DIS
covery OF the former marriage made but denies that
Mr. Barlow ceased to yJ with her after Noyemb, %
she admits her marriage by the Rev Charles F. Deems &c
Mr. COtre in 1870 sho adds that for two years before
her marriage with Mr. Cottrel, Mr.. Barlow aad been
constant Sn9r ana mat he wac greatly depres cd by her
union with his rival After the marriage however he
continued to Visit h and wss an intimate friend OF the
tOns against Mr. Cottreiis fidelity, saying that
Several T&s wpp s Mrs Of Rord Fepqs m tS6.e Se
charges Barlow, she declares said that he had positive
TO the truth o. them He also declared his continued de
yoOn TO the then Mrs COtre urged her TO get divorce
and SAID that ne wished then to marry her Mrs Cotre
nnaly yieIded ana ane employed Ihomas W PlImah As
counsel In proceedings for an absolute divorce The case
was referred by Justice Dcnohne in me supreme Court
that Mr. Cottreh was guilty II the charge
against lin On Jny II, Mrs Barlow states, hei
lawyer told her that the referee lad IN her ay
and that she was free The referees fees, ne
sald were @4O ana OF his she had already pad so
mrs barrow declares That she knew nUtAng or the forms
oi law and that she that the referees re,
port V0nd have to be confirmed and decree or divorce
H3hcd ny me court Her lawyer did not tell het tlat
this vas necessary. Mr. Barlow agreed to attend 10 the
fees lie SAID that he well posted in divorce cases,
as he had areaDy got from his former wife Then.
Mr.. Barlow lovingly told drs COttrell mat she free
ne then put ring on my finger" Mrs. BarloW
They began to live together Mr. Barlow on Octobe l3,
he would date the crrtlfcats back so that il would be all
right" Mr Barlow had meanwhile introduced her as his
wife.
subsequently, Mrs Barlow learned that 5Ir Cotte
looking for her. and she hored to en that he de
cared that there had been 10 divorce granted. she
demanded explanation Of Mr.. Barlow, who
who said that he had reported IN favor OF decree of d
vors but that the report had NOT been taken up Mr. Bar
before the court decree of divorce granted No
vemhcr 2, 1850. 5ti Nr. Barlow did not marry the
plaintiff lie told me-" Mrs. Barlow AYERS. That an
other marriage was not necessary on NOVelnoei -,
1880 Mr. Barlow abandoned the paintif aud refused To
ties and Correction who secured to her ron Police JUS
tco a weekly allowance Of - week Mr.. B-rlow
Paa Pa odST %3oH' he a'' cdSF ga 'Gga M IE Bo|
accordingly I'm November 1882 applied to the Court Of
order compelling the oGteGdHI ID pay ihS Ieteee t9s
rne order was granted. Mr.. Barlow did rot obey thc
order Finally I'm November last the defendant was ad
Judged guilty OF contempt OF court lie was Eresttd ana
was lodged in the Ludlow Stree. Jail "hefe he s re-
mains Ms own suit :or an a4nulment OF the marriage
notion was recently made before Judge
Van HoGsen for vac.tion OF the 9r,eTr T
OF arrest Mr Barlow Ccposes that hs counsel refused
10 appear IN court until h fees were paid and these Mr.
Barlow declares he unable to pay He says that he
strovcd his business ny her drunken habits Mr- Bar
low denies this charge One affidavit the proc adings
sets orh that Mr Barlow once ooktho deponen through
Tie BOwery Theatre ana said that Ac T'd an interest IN
It, Nj Barlow swcars to the contrary, nd aleSe, that
IL IL hi brother Wi, interested the theatre. Judge
Van Hoesen states that he i rot satisfied nat r Barlow
unable pay the referees fees and I" obey the order OF
the ,omt He therefore refuses TO yacate the order ot
arrest.