Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1891-12-10

Miss st. John charges that since her
marriage to the defendant he has treated
her In a most cruel manner and also has
been criminally intimate with other
women. Miss St. Johns suit is a counter
action brought to offset a similar suit
against her by Marius. He alleges that
his wife has had improper relations with
Arthur Cohen. sub-editor of the Financial
News. Marius asks no money damages
against Cohen, but only asks the court to
rid him of his marriage ties.
Sir Charles Russell appeared for the
petitioner and c. F. Gill for the respond
ent. Mr.. Gill admitted that the charge of
adultery was true, but asserted that it had
not occurred until Miss st. John deserted
her husband. Sir Charles Russell stated
that Marius aud Miss St. John fell in love
when they were both married persons.
They so far forgot their duties to
thiir respective partners that
the procuring of divorce
by Mrs. Marius and another by Miss st.
Johns husband was rendered necessary.
After these divorces were granted Marius
married Miss St. John. The couple did
not live happily and scenes of violence oc.
Cured frequently between them. Finally,
in September 1888, Marius knocked his
wife down and so abused her that had it
not been for the fact that her brother was
in the house there is no saying how his
violence would have ended. After this
trouble they no longer lived together as
man and wife.
Miss st. John was called to the witness
box and said she met Marius in 1879.
After he had been divorced from his wife
and she from her husband. She married
him in '85. In '96 a child was born to
them. She had much reason to complain
of ..Marius' Incorporate habits in 1887
and 1888. When drunk he was
very vicious and insulting. Wit.
ness gave in detail number of
acts of cruelty on the part of the respond
ent. Miss st. John denied that she told a
man named Bonish that If he appeared in
court in this case she would have him
arrested for theft. She said she only asked
him if he was goiug to repay the money
he had stolen from her. He denied having
stolen money. Witness stated
her husband. When at Nice she wrote
him daily. He had written her very in
decent letter, which she had not kept.
She had complained of the indecency of
her husbands expressions.
The witness admitted that she had
dined with Arthur Cohen in public places.
He was very kind to her, and her husband
made no objection to Cohen visiting and
giving her presents; on the contrary he
rather encouraged him. She said she
was not fifteen years old when she was
first married. She went to Monte Carlo
with Lady's Euston. Cohen was there
also but not with her. Afterwards she
went with Cohen, Mr.. Wertheimer and
Lady Euston to Nice. Cohen gave her
jewelry just as other people did. She
did not tell her husband on one occasion
when he threw watch at her that she
would visit Cohen as much as she liked.
She denied that she was in the habit Of
using obscene language, and testified that
she received affectlonate letters from her
husband after their separation.
imploring her to return to him. She
admitted writing her husband stating
that she had heard that he declared that
she had been intimate with Harry Marius,
proprietor of the Financial News. She
had not thought him base enough to
make that assertion, but man
named Harvey, and Captain Blythe told
her he cher husband) was trying to black
mail Marius Captain Blythe told her that
Col. North (the nitrate king) said Marius
would be glad to injure him.
At this point the court adjourned.