Los Angeles herald., 1892-10-07
HANDSOME MRS, ALBER7US,
She Wants a Bogus Divorce
Decree Annulled.
The Little Portrait Maker the Sub
ject of Serious Charges.
happenings Yesterday In the Courts
Cases in the United States
Courts-New Suits-Court
Notes.

The domestic complications which
follow the career of John Albertus,
whose cheap portrait scheme has caused
many of our citizens to become ac-
quainted with the nervous little fellow,
have been brought once more to public
notice by complaint which was en-
tered on the register of actions in the
superior court yesterday.
A few months ago Albertus gained
considerable notoriety in San Diego and
Los Angeles by sending hysterical tel
egrsm to the chief of police in this city,
asking him to find his wife, who had
left him and was crazy. The papers
were full OF the movements of the pretty
little woman and the money she was
married him. They patched up their
differences and are now living in Los
Angeles, or have been up to very re-
cent date.
But the complaint filed shows up a
curious episode in the life of Albertus.
| 1t is made bv Mrs. Susan A. Albertus,
and she seeks to annul divorce which
John Albertus secured from her, claim
ing that it was fraudulently obtained.
The document is quite long and if the
allegations are sustained it will show
Albertus up in an ugly light, and furnish
one more instance OF loose divorce laws,
and the ease with which frauds are per-
petrated in that class of litigation.
Mrs. Albertus alleges that she was
married to John Albertus at Anaconda,
| Montana, and that she was resident
of Los Angeles November 1, 1888. About
that date che returned to New Jersey 10
visit relatives. She only intended to be
absent few months. Her husband
knew that she had returned TO Camden,
New jersey, where her relatives lived,
and that she was only gone on short
visit.
In spite of this, however, while she
was absent. and without her knowledge,
July "a, 1890, he filed a complaint
against her for divorce, alleging extreme
cruelty as the grounds. The complaint
was filed in the superior court of this
county and was assigned to Judge Nc
Kinley's department.
August 29.h Albertus filed an affidavit
in the case in which he said that the de-
fendant resided out of the state, and
that she could not be found. He stated
that he had written to Consta BILE John
F. Renner, at Cramer Hill, Camden
county, New Jersey, to ascertain her
place of residence and that Renner re-
piled that while she had lived there up
to June 15, 1890, she had then moved to
Roxborough, Pennsylvania. On the
strength of this affidavit publication was
made in the Porcupine of this city OF the
divorce proceedings.
Mrs. Albertus alleges that she returned
to Los Angeles November 81, 1890, and
remained here until December, and dur
ing that time met Albertas. He did not
say anything to her about any divorce
proceedings and she did not know until
year thereafter that he secured the
divorce December 15, 1890. But the
trial came on and Albertus did secure a
divorce upon the grounds alleged in his
complaint. Mrs. Albertus claims that
the whole proceedings were without her
knowledge, and that shel never received
any notice that they had been instituted.
She prays, therefore, that the decree of
divorce granted by Judge Mckinley be
annulled, and that she be granted such
other relief as may be found proper.
The allegations are of a decidedly
rough nature, and when the case comes
up the developments may involve AL
bertus in grave trouble. should the COM
plainant be able to produce satisfactory
proof OF her assertions.