New-York tribune., 1892-08-23
uR1cE S. WoRMSER SUED.
AN UGLY CHAPTER IN HIS HISTORY.
OLIVE TURNER SAYS SHE IS HIS CoMMoNLAw
WIFE AND WANTS ANMoNY.

OLIVE TURNER SAYS SHE IS HIS CoMMoN-LAw
WIFE AND WANTS ANMoNY.
Maurice S. wormser son Of Simon wormser. the
well.known Wall ST. banker. was married last April
at Temple Emanuel to Florine Renger. the daughter
q, solomon Renger whose transactions in cotton have
made him also we'll known in the commercial world.
dark page In the history Of young Wormser previous
to his marriage has now come to light. Inc scahuai
was first made public yesterday before Judge Patter
son "a the supreme Court. woman who Calls her-
self Olive Turner wormscr alleges that she Is the
common law wife of young Wormser She sues Tor
a divorce on the ground Of his desertion when he
married Miss Renger; ana her attorney. Charles ".
Brookes yesterday made application for alimony
OF 500 week and 81 900 counsel fees. pending the
suit.
When Mr.. Brooke In Supreme Court to argue
for the application. there was present crowd OF
lawyes and interested friends Of the parties concerned
In the long argument which followed on both sides
many facts came to light highly discreditable to
Maurice wormser's former mode OF life. According to
Mr. Brooke his client was q much-abised woman.
Young wormscr met her March Is, 1885, and
until last April lived with her, treating and acknowi
edging her constantly as his wife. They hrst lived
at No. 59l Park-ave., where they went as soon as
Wormser had gained the consent OF the woman to be
hs wife She saws that she asked Wormser repeatedly
TO have their marriage solemnized by clergyman or
r,bM Wormser refused saying that should his father
hear OF It he would be cut of without penny and
all means Of support for both would be gone. wormser
added, it is said: "why, Ollie, you are my wife,
could not mar, Jyou any more II went Win you 70
fifty churches"
The woman's anldavits add moreover. that she had
absolutely refused to live with wormser until he had
agreed to assume all the relations OF husband that
I'm fact he treated her as his wife with every refne
ment that be introduced her to other people as his
lawfully welded wife; and that all the radespeople
with whom they had dealings considered her. The
woman's afidavits further aver that when her hus-
bands money became low she took lessons In painting
I'm orlp some time to profit by her proficiency. She
took the lessons at the Dominican Convent. Mr.
Vormser and she both went there Snan and wife,
and the nuns visited them in the city, understanding
that such relationship existed AS matter OF course
When Mr.. Brooke had finished Frederick johnson.
of the firm OF Hoadley, Lauterbach Johnson argued
for the defence. Young Mr.. Wormser, he said, mad
met the plaintiff who called herself Ove Kent turner
at a dIsordery house. He had merely lived with her.
erstanding her reputation common woman.
The defendant denied ever having Acknowledged the
woman I'm any way as his wife. He treated her
kindly but the relation between them was well under
stood Mr. Wormser's afidavits in this particular
absolutely contradicted those OF the woman VINO
produced grocery book made out to Mrs worniser'
whereas It had been said that she was never called py
that name but known Mrs Russell or Mrs.
Turner ,
Mr. johnson then produced a letter written py inc
woman to Wormser Just before his marriage TO Miss
Renger. The woman says There Is nothing ior me
to step down and out which sase aas tho ne deS
Mr. Johnson Said further that he could produce
ali elm to Wormser. Mr.. Brooke for the plaintiff: 4t
secured time to prepare answering % H't i merely
SaeRmai which they preferred to carry to the courts
| rather than tolerate