New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1885-11-21
THE VAN ANTWERP DIVORCE CASE.
THE PLAINTIFF TELLS HER STORY.

HER HUSBANDS REFUSAL TO TELL WHERE THE
BONDS HAD GONE CAUSED ALL THE TROUBLE.
Mr.. and Mrs. William Van Antwerp, the
cousins who married and after niue years parted because
the husband refused account Tor securities worth
Sl35 900 belonging to his wife, which she now ohatcS
him with converting each other IN the superior
Court yesterday, but did not exchange word Inc ''"'
of her suit for separation and maintenance Wis rrO-
ceedpd with Theodore Van Antwerp IiOttef pI''hFF u
the plaintiff testified that after Mr.. Van Antwerp mar
red her they lived in the house OF the pabHS ihthor
who died a month after the marriage. leaving 10 MS
langher the securities which Mr. Van Antwerp a'tet-
ward converted. II was agreed that the witness his
mother and Mr. Van Antwerp should each pay onethird
OF tho household expenses. on April 30, lssl the de-
PENDANT owed 81 200 this account These expenses
amounted TO about $4,000 year. In the summer OF
1884 the Witness mother paid I'LL Tor board IN INC
country for Mrs Van Antwerp, child and nurse when
the defendant failed pay The defendant told him thnt
he had used about 100000 OF his wifes property aud
that within six months no wOuld restore II all Ie H'
il would disgrace him before the world TO tel WHAT hd
become OF it, the witness at his sisters request du
not speak OF 1t. Last January Mr. Van Antwerp toin
him that he had borrowed money from trds eCmphey
on his wiics securities and had aferward tak"n them
m and given them to third person, hut IN regard To
who that person he said H. none o. jour hn'i-
ness won tell you" Mrs. Van Antwerp Threatened
10 send him to state Prison ne did rot tell andlh" Wit
ness told him that II he midc ful confession nothing
would he done TO him.
o.-You are very hostile to Nr. Van Antwerp arc yon
hc The witness said he had not advised his not 70
i've allow MN 10 10
the house The Building DeTartnent had taken acton
i'm regard TO the Apartment house buit 10y Mt Van AH'
wern M Il, src6nd-st and Parlavc ou account OF
defect IN the walls. which haG To be taken down ne u
not regard his sister aud her husband a- an aecI'n"e
Mrs Elizabeth Van Antwerp testified that she did Lot
know hoH much property hc 'athoi l'i hcI IL wa ~
| her brother she told her husband :" place ,hcG 10 II
safe deuasit company ana n dd So Shn never oiu 'h
:" disi,se of the securities. sho signed mort ,arr
what II was when she signed It, she -lln'd papers Tor
N husband NJ vsriou. tiincs without examining them.
10000 had been prr-ctcd TO her Tor pay ment She hl
been served with summons on one o me- 'r,r'y
aount- ed to only 1000 or $1,000 and he would ser hat
they paid. She never AUTHORIZE him 70 DulI''
any prOuerty Tor He left her on April g. ana hAd
never returned her requested her 10 I'VE WIN MN
az ns ie%aIciped the witness said that she and her
husband lad had no dincuios before the money trans
! action. ..-.... 49,, t,,,.,, ord co,,.,
u should have been willing lose every cent OF my
money II Mr. Van Antwerp had given me stHcincn oI
what had become IT, Money had nothing 1" DO with ~
I never will acknowledge that. ] threatened 10 Sthl
him 10 the state Prison he dd not tell what lie lAd
| done with the bonds my father left me
The witness stld sEe Gtien 70 sTe Hel ' m uV
House after he left her lie asked eT to come
acted like IA true and honest man. she said. nud had
told me my bonds were would have gone to i've
would 1--we with her husband again. Packages sent 10
her by her husband she had returned unopened by advice
OF her counsel Her husband was temperate man, o
| good disposition. fond Of HE home.
eO-Was he fond of youl Al don't think he was in
"" w Did Won love himi Al did until lss3. After
that could not. cannot love hin when don't respect
The witness said their bills at watering places some
| times amounted 10 81 900 IN a season.
! Odd you ask him for anyIhihg that hc re
| fusedl 4 - never asked INN for any hlnS.
The trial Will proceed on MONDAY