St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1890-12-25
IURN ALL IUIAlIERS
The Supreme Court Rips the
Barteau Case Into Frag-
mentS,
And Sareastically Vouchsafes
It's Reasons to the Trial 81 g
Judge. :
lu.
Josiah Fairchild Exonerated
From All Taint of Con- ~
spiracy. At
ia
The Divorce Had No Part in
Securing Mrs. Bapteau's "a
Rights. ~


decision of Judge Kelly, of the district
court, in the ease.of Annice G. Bafteau
against William l.. Barteau and others.
a careful perusal of the opinion of
Justice MITCHELL, of the supreme court.
who wrote the decision of that court.
demonstrates the fact that the case was
ripped up the back. down the sides and
haggied to pieces sideways, leaving
William l.. Barteau in full caHtroi.
Judge Kelly had decided that the iii
vorce granted w. l.. Barteau from his
wife was nuIlity, and that the subse-
quent marriage with Marry Bailey was
therefore Illegal. He also decided that
the property standing in the name of
Mary Bailey or Barteau was worth at
least S5ii.0O0. and was the proceeds OF
investments made with money derived
from Anniee 6. Barteau. He also or
dered an accounting of the property
with view of securing her property
rights to Annice g. y irteau. The cause
was carried to the supreme court upon
refusal to grant new trial. The at
tOrneys in this litigation were for Mrs.
Barleau, Charles N. Bell AMI Harvey
Ofiicer: for the defendants, e. f. Lane
and nj. r. Tyler.
The Courts Opinion.
The opinion of the supreme court re-
views the ease in detail. and rpvrrses
the order of the lower court refusing to
grant a new trial. 1t also lays down
the rule of construction TO be applied
to the many points raised in tine case.
1t declares that the divorce from An
nice &. Barteau was not properly in
Issue and is not annuiled. 1t also CON-
pietelv eXonorateS J"siah talrchiid
from any improper motive, and
characterlZeS his connection with the
case as being huSiness-lIke and proper.
There were two points aiSed in the de
ciSlOn, one of them being whether the
decree of the lower court annulling the
decree of divorce between Annice q.
Barteau and w. l.. Barleau was within
OF responsive 10 any issue in the cas- :.
The other principle point was whether
the innings of fact as to the Fraudulent
character of the cUivpyavceS To Mary
Bailey were Justified by the evidence.
The court says: I'VE are clearly of the
opinion that both must he answered IN
the negative"
The gist of the action is declared to
be the alleged fraudulent trans er of
Annice q. Barteau'S property by w. l..
Barteau To Mary Bailey, ant. the object
OF the action was to rec0 er the prop
erty or its proceeds. The anHuInnent of
the decree of divorce was pot {, part of,
or al all necessary to the fullest relief
TO Annice Il. Barteau as to her property
rights. These rights Could he a. effect
uaIly prOtt ctrd and enforced with the
decree of divorce standing aS if vaeatpd.
The case WAS not tried by counsel Oh
the theory that tie divorce was in issue.
and the order setting aSiie the
divorce was unwarranted amt erroneous.
As to the question of the fin iiugs as to-
Fraudulent character of Il transfer of
the property 10y Barteau,t ecpllcluSionS
arc so different from that of the leart-
ed trial judge. the supreme court says
it is due 10 his recognized keen SENSE of
justice and the high norai Standard
upon which he decided the case 10 give
at length the reasons Tor the conclusions
arrived at. There are Some Things about
the case that would naturally incline
toward sympathy towards Aunice &.
Barteau, and there. are Other things
which are not calculated 10 elevate Will
lam l.. Barteau in the opinion of the
court, but suits mu>t toe decided
according tn established legal princi-
pies, and not OH mere sentiment or ac-
cOr,ling to some ideal mora, basis re-
CARELESS of legal rules. The opinion
then anal ZeS tile evidence in the Case
at length, 1t Is stated that i'll 1873 Mrs.
Barteau had about 5000. ami that w.
l.. Bartrau decided her the Appleton
mill property hi consideration of the
balance she had laft after spending
part in buying furniture and other
things. This Appleton mill property
was sold for SS.UUJ. and about S:'.5HJ or
S4.500 of The proceeds was lost in The
business of Mcclure Brothers " Barteau.
leaving Barteau inselvent, ami he has
"a war a AitS in l,is
own narne.
In 1S77 he purchased cal estate in the
name Of his wife ANA sold il at ii profit.
With a part of the proceeds they took
A Trip TO Europe
in 1878; he returned i'm the spring of
1879 aud she short time thereafter.
He continued to- deal i'll real estate with
the money of his wife saved out of the
Appleton mill property sale. In thes..
dealings he acted as the agent of hts
wife. In 1892, Mrs. Bart.au spent SOME
time In the East and IN 1885, consulted
attorneys Wilson and Barrett with
reference to procuring a divorce. She
went to Europe in 1853 and returned
in May. 1854. out went buck in june of
the same year, leaving her property in
the hands of her husband as agent. and
subject to his management. He was to
do as he pleased with il ana remit her
monthly money To pay her EXPENSES.
She had given him power of attorney
some time before, and in 1854 executed
t0 Josiah Falrchild power of attnrn y.
permitting him to execute eoHyeyances
of real estate in her naIie. FairchiId
was not TO handle or manage the tiratp-
erty, but this was To betione exclusively
by the husband. and depdS and mort
CAGES were given aud taken by
I him in her iIaIne, Fairehihi,
whenever necessary, executing deeas
for her. The husband sent, with vary
ing regularity, TO ,his wife SO to SIS
per month, until Sept. 1. 1855. About
this time letters were written which
Justice Mitchell says accurately photo
graphed the entire situation"
She was DESTROYS of securing divorce
prior to Aug. 81, 1888. wanting division
OF the property in equal parts. The
opinion states that the correspondence
shows that Mrs. Barteau was
woman of intelligence and keen per-
ception. 1t is also stated that the
letters showed that she knew chat Bar
teau wanted divorce IN order to marcy
again. and that she was willing that he
should have it; also that she was will
ing to open negotiations by which Bar
teau was to have the property anu pay
her monthly allowance IN cash.
A proposition VAS made by Barteau
to secure to her uArtgage on the Wa
cOuta street property for QUO draw
ing per cent interest, which would sp-
cure her $1,000 Il year. She about this
time did business through Barrett as an
attorney, but employad John w. White
in his stead. She sent White
'Ehe Notice for Divorce
with service accepted, and employed
him to look up tile property of Barttau
and its membranes. He was also in
Strueted to secure the best terms pussi-
BITE for securing her an allowance Oh a
half-interest III the property. She sug-
gested, however, that mortgage for
100000 be secured to her. But in Jan
.uary. 1856. after Barteau had written
Offering d mortgage of S15, goo, she wrote
TO White to do the best he could. She
had instructed White to turn over the
acceptance of notice for divorce after
the property rights should be fixed nm