The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1892-03-28
TANGLED OUT OF TUNE
Marriage Bells Which
Might Better Never Have
Been Rung.
MRS. RUSSELL's JEALOUS SPOUSE
Harvey VS.. Harvey, Riegel VS..
Riegel and Joerns VS.. Joerns
Before the Chancellor.
IRIS. RUSSELL's JEALOUS SPOUSE

When George Russell, son Of Pastor w
H. Russell of the Union Place Methodist
Church of Union Hill was married to Miss
Jennie Emmonet. a stunningly pretty
French girl, darK-eyed brunette, two
years ago. no one ever thought that the
beautiful, bride would be compelled to
have her husband arrested for abandon
ment. Yet this has occurred and last
Saturday the pretty bride of two years
swore out warrant for her husbands
arrest ana he was arraigned before Re-
corder Hauenstein and gave bail. The
pretty wife, with tears in her eyes, told
her story In voice eloquent with sobs.
Two years ago while living ather fathers
house in West Hoboken she met young
Russell. After an energetic suit of three
months the young man obtained her con-
sent to the marriage, and soon after his
father united them, as she hoped, for
ever.
JEALOUSY AND CRUELTY.
Her husband was jealous, however,
unreasonaby so--and this caused con-
tinual quarreling. From upbraiding he
turned To abusing her, and accused her OF
flirting. Six months after the marriage
a rather spicy quarrel terminated by her
husband driving her into the street. She
fled to her fathers house, but he, who had
been opposed to her marriage told her
she could find no harborage with him.
She was Russeps wife, he said. and be-
longed with him. With tears in her eyes
and a bleeding heart she turned away
and found refuge with friends. Later
her husband met her and pleaded with
her to return. She did so, and lived with
him peacefully for a short time. when the
monster with verdant optics again crept
in and made small hell of their erst-
while paradise. She was again driven
from the house. She consulted Lawyer
DAILY, who told her she had no case for a
divorce. She then concluded to take the
distasteful slip before mentioned and
had her husband arrested. Russell, it is
said, has a good position in New York
and lives well. He could not be seen at
at his fathers house, where. it is stated,
he lives.
Joerns VS.. Joerns.
Judge Daily today applied to Chancellor
McGill for rule to show cause whyla
decree in the suit for divorce obtained by
Elsie Joerns against her husband, George
Joerns should not be reopened. The
Chancellor heard the reasons and granted
the rule making 1t returnable next
Monday.
The divorce was obtained upon allega-
| lions of cruelty and inhuman conduct on
| the part of the husband, who declarsd In
an affidavit that when he found himself
| TO be divorced from his wife he was the
| most surprised man in the county. His
affidavit sets forth that Lonis Stein, q
| well-known Hoboken real estate dealer,
| was, during 1889 and 1890, the star boarder
| in his boarding house at No. 8S Hudson
street, Hoboken. The document states
| that upon many occasions Joerns found
| his wife and Stein in the parlor with no
one else present, and Joerns decidedly OBJ
| jected to the tender expression he denoted
| In his wife's eyes and the caressing tones
of STEMS voice. On one occasion Joerns
found his wife lying on sofa and
| Stein was sitting along side of her.
! He complained that he did not
| believe that even the code of morals
| Of McAllister's 400 insisted ON husband
enduring this. and he interposed serious
| objections TO such conduct. He insisted
| that his wife should dismiss the star
boarder and to no longer receive him al
| the house.
FIRED HER HUSBAND.
| The attractive wife, when she received
| this order from her lord and master
| stamped her dainty foot and ex
| claimed:-
"You go before Stein."
| The suffering husband then appealed
| to Stein TO leave his house and wife. but
| the real estate agent refused. During the
latter part of February. 1890. Joerns
became so thoroughly disheartened
at the way his wife treated Stein that he
said to her that they had better stop tax.
| ing boarders and asked her to give the
| business up. He said he could no longer
stand the sight of Stein about the house
| His wife pouted little and replied
II will go with you. but wherever 1 gc
| Stein goes"
Joerns could not discover that thi.
would be any improvement on the past
| and he concluded to go alone. He left
| her but soon after returned to tell hel
| she was forgiven if she would forget
| Stein. This she declined to do, Joerns
| in his affidavit swears that from Febru.
ary. 1890 to November of that year, hi:
| wife lived ut No. 241 Bloomfield street in
| suite of rooms provided by Stein, who
| frequently shared their comforts. IL
| November, the affidavit states, Mrs
| Joerns moved to Union Hill and now
| lives with Stein in house owned by
| him. His daughter Eliza, sixteen years
| old, and son George, seven years old, are
with their mother.
THE DIVORCE PROCEEDINGS.
| The affidavit sets forth that during the
summer of 1890, Joerns was u steward al
| Coney Island, and while there he received
| a letter from Lawyer Samuel Besson re-
| questing him to visit the Court House or
| business. When JoeruS went there he
was served with citation in the divorce
suit brought by his wife. He went to hei
and begged that she would abandon such
proceedings for the sake of the children
and he offered her money. She replied:-
II have orders to take no money from
you."
The wife, with characteristic frank
ness, admitted to her husband that SJeir
had given her the money needed for the
case, but finally she allowed her husband
| to believe that she would not continue
| the case. He declared in his affidavit thai
| he did not know that decree nd beer
| obtained until he was handed a copy of it
| He said he had not been properly served
with necessary papers. The case may
prove interesting when heard next Mon
| day.
Riegel VS.. Riegel.
| The suit for diverse brought by Berths
| B. Riegel against her husband, Henry
Joseph Riegel. of st. Paul. Mimi, was set
down for trial Monday next by Chancello
McGill this morning. The defendant il
accused of having deserted his wife, whicl
| through his lawyer, j Herbert Potts. i!
denied. Mr.. Potts also claims that Mrs
! Riegel has no ground for the suit be
| c use she has not been resident of thu
| State two years, which the statute make;
| comnulanrv hafOra divnrca nrOcaedi N o.,