Evening journal., 1889-02-04
THE FoueERAY DIVORCE.
Fougeray win Contest the DEGREES Of
the Philadelphia Court-His Statement
of the Case.

of the Case.
The Fougeray divorce case like Ban
quo's ghost, viii not down. The Phila-
delphia papers on Saturday last contained
rehash of the whole affair, brought
about by an attempt of Sarah FougeIay
to obtain allmony. Common Pleas Court
No 1, in Philadelphia, granted the former
wife SIS week upon the ground that
Fougeray was not a resident Of Delaware
at the time he obtained the divorce here.
The judgment Of the Philadelphia courts
was obtained by his failing to make an
appearance, he not thinking it necessary.
He viii not ask that the case be reopened
To an EVENING JOURNAL reporter this
morning Mr.. Fougeray made the follow
ing statement:
When | moved to Wilmington in the
spring of 1879 my then wife was a resi-
dent of Camden. n. j., having moved
there with my furniture in March, 1876
She moved back to Philadelphia in Feb
ruary, 1884, to her present residence. No
l4lS South Broad street | made applica-
ton for divorce in September, 1877, in
Philadelphia and abandoned il before il
was heard, the time of hearing being set
Tor April, 1878. After the abandonment
support, and in October, 1878, the court
made an order on me to pay her 81 per week.
which did until Marcn. 1885. when
procured divorce by an act Of the Legis.
lature Of that year was resident of
Delaware twenty-one months when |
made my first application to the Delaware
Legislature and as the Committee on Di
vorces of the session Of 1881 were Cd.
posed to hearing any cases that could be
tried IN the courts, the case was dismissed.
| then made an application to the Superior
Court Of New Castle county the
same year. 1881, and as Il
could not get service on my then wife.
| abandoned that case and had no trial.
| made application TO the Legislature
again in the session of 1884. and the case
was heard and argued, it being the first
case tried Of any of the applications. II
passed the House and died in the Senate.
then made another attempt to bring NV
case before the courts Of New Castle
10y serving notice on my then wife
while she was in the jurisdiction
Of Delaware, but by my in.
ability to get my witnesses from Phila-
delphia to come to Delaware, aban-
doned that case also. | made my final
application TO the Legislature of Della
ware and procured M divorce by a ma
jority Of % TO 6. Ny wife was repre-
scented by the ablest counsel Of Della.
ware TO defend her. She fought the case
bitterly, and, as she claimed, II the Legis.
lature granted me divorce that IL would
debar her from receiving any
more support made from the courts o.
Philadelphia to compel me to pay her 81
per week. In order TO offset the weekly
stipend Of 81 per week. the committee
awarded her the sum of s. 600 which she
afterwards accepted and took with her to
Philadelphia She now has asked the
courts Of Philadelphia TO grant her
alimony pending the divorce proceedings
against her former husband, which the
courts have just granted her IS
a week, on the ground, that
the Delaware divorce was void
In my humble opinion my wife
has obtained this decision from the
courts through rank perjury and taking
advantage Of my not making any defence
The courtsof Pennsylvania have no iuris-
diction in the case, as | have resided in
Delaware for ten years. / can't see why
the courts of Pennsylvania can rule in
my case as my divorce was granted by
the Legislature and is law Of the state
and must be respected, and my divorce
was obtained by no fraud or bribery or
false testimony and was granted me upon
facts alone after being a resident six
years
In regard to his present wife, Emma F.
Fougeray, nee West, Mr.. Fougeray de-
MES that there has been any separation
whatever. In the former proceedings
for divorce his first wife so slandered.
the then Miss West, that when the di.
vorce was granted he felt in honor bound
to marry her and did so. The divorce
had been such a scandal in this State
that she preferred to take up her resi-
dence in the State of Pennsylvania and
he was now paying her $50 a month for
support. They were on the very best
Of terms and they saw each other FIRE
quently; only last week she was
in this city and spent the day
with him. This suit is only brought TO
harass him in Philadelphia, There is no
way she can obtain the money unless she
arrests him while he is in Philadelphia
on business. AS to the girl Nellie Win
gate, Mr.. Fougeray says that she worked
in his store and when he closed his bust
ness. formerly at 4l6 Market street, he
engaged her as his housekeeper and no
one could take any exceptions to his
course in that matter. There is per
feet understanding between his present
wife and himself, and they are on tie
best Of terms.
Mrs Fougeray No. had to represent
her in her first two applications Charles
B. Lore, Esq, and when the case came
up the third time Mr. Lore refused to
have anything to do with the matter.
having become convinced that he was
entitled to it, and when he obtained it
Mr.. Lore was the first to congratulate
him. Adultery was alleged on both sides
in the case in all the suits for divorce
until the last, Mrs. Fougeray No
claimed that her husband had frequently
committed adultery with Miss West.
The successful application was granted
upon the grounds Of incompatibility Of
temper When Mrs. Fougerav No / re-
ceived her 81, 900 she made quite a
''splinge" around Dover, driving with
two horses all over the town. and there
were some ugly rumors about her at the
time.