The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1892-05-05
MONEY WAS HIS IDOL.
Trial Of the Divorce Cvss OF JeweIel
Cummings.

Trial Of the Divorce Csss of Jeweler
Cummings.
Lewis B. Cummings, the Montgomery
street ieweler, and his wife Nellie A. oecu-
pied the attention yesterday of Judge
Hebbard with the recital of the wrongs and
ITibulatiens, faneied or real, On which they
base their respective prayers for divorce
They were married in Alameda in January,
1881, aud have as children two boys, aged 8
and 3.
It was be who originally commenced the
action for divorce on the ground of her
alleged desertion in September, 1890. when
she went TO Los Angeles, where she now
lives. She insisted upon going, and he, on
account Of his good heart" as he said,
gave her the household furniture and $40 a
month, besides which she has endeavored
TO earn money by giving lessons n painting
and music and by keeping = few dodgers,
notwithstanding which she has run herself
In debt some 500.
Cummings testified that his wife was too
extTayagant for his means; that she went
to Los Angeles some 20 times, and when he
demonstrated With her she became angry
and demanded that he give her their house.
hold furniture aud $50 a month, which he
agreed to do. He said be paid her that
SUM until the commencement of the action
for divorce, when, acting under advice Of
his attorney, he discontinued such pay
ments.
Cummings further testified that he runs
his store and pays for his own personal eX-
penSeS on $50 a month, and to demonstrate
what no considered was extravagance on
her part said he could live on 81 day.
The plaintiff also gave in testimony that
he had sold out his interest In the jewelTy
business TO his brother for $4,000. He was
unable TO Tec0llect what he had done with
the money. he swore that on January 1
mis- assets were $500 and his debts about
$1,000. He has been losing about $40 a
month since January. Another remarkable
feature in the testimony was that while In
partnership for many years with brother
they kept no books. but acted toward each
other more like brothers than partners,
drawing whatever they needed without re-
gard TO amounts.
Mrs. Cummings has a cross-complaint, 10
which she asks for a separation on the
ground Of cruelty and for the custody OF
the youngest child. She says she was made
sick a. heart and in body by his GOODNESS
and his everlasting accusations Of eXtrava-
gance while living at 2l37 Polk street and
elsewhere, even charging that with his
parsimony he not only starved her but the
children. She says that she let him have
some $1,000 odd Of her savings to use in bis
business, but that he has never repaid it or
given her any account Of &C, claiming also
that with the money earned by her she has
main had 90 support and clothe herself
and childlen.
A witness was introduced in her behalf
TO testify that he once roomed with them
for some three years. and that Cummings
was so parsim0niOus that the wife had
frequently no money in the nous e; that ne
would himself, after coming home in the
evening. go out and make small pure bases
. Of vegetables for the dining-table: aud
again on an occasion when they were off
on fishing excursion at Sausalito and the
subject Of a clam-ehowder was suggested
he refused to partake or allow his wife to
do so, saying they would wait until they
returned home before eating anything.
The trial will be resumed to-day.