The morning call., 1893-11-15
WILL HER NAME BE {?
Does a Limited Contract Tie the
Knot ?
AN EXTENSION OF MARRIAGE,
Story of a Peculiar Marriage That
Brings to Light Many Knotty
Legal Problems.

The courts Of this State will doubtless
soon be called upon to solve as knotty
legal problem as has come before them for
many day.
Is a contract of marriage. stipulated to
expire at the end of six months or a year,
8 valid document? That is the question,
and there are a score of side issues con-
nected with it. If the document be valid
Is the limitation good? Does the limita-
ton inyalidate the contract? Can the
marital relations of the contracting par
ties be legally laid aside at the end of the
prescribed time? Would a child born
after the limit has expired and were the
contract not renewed, be legal child?
All these. of course, hinge upon the
validity of the contract. There are no
known precedents under the laws OF this
State by which the problem can be solved.
and those personally interested in the con-
tract are in sore perplexity.
Perhaps the least of the latter are the
contracting parties themselves. They are
Young. in love and inclined 10 be philosO-
phical rather than practical Her name
was. Miss Lille MahOney seven months
ago. 1t is now Mrs. Edward NJ. Elkus.
What will it be in eleven months?
Sheis the daughter OF plumber who is
neither rich nor poor. He is the son
of wealthy parents. Mr.. E'kus pere
is at present the one most vIsibly inter-
csted. He frowns upon the contrast. He
says il is illegal and is anxious to believe
what he says.
: The several leading lawyers interviewed
on the subject yesterday take different
view of the matter than Mr.. Elkus pere
does. AS these were about the same in
tenor, the citing of Henry s. Fosters
OnrTioO will answer the DurpOSn.
We'll. in the first place, the law in this
State:is never 10 dissolve a marriage agree
ment when TO do such would be agains the
public policy. Surely no one will contend
that it would be good policy for the State
TO permit limited marriages. Once mar
ried always married is good maxim. II
the contracting parties have assumed
marital relations they are man and wife
though the contract read for day. The
only question is. to my mind, did the par
ties assume, willingly and honestly, the
positions of husband and wife toward each
other? The Limitation clause is simply
null"
The point OF view that the contract pair
take on the question would be Interesting
if 1t could be obtained. Their point of
view on the original cOntracts-there were |
two Of them-wOuld be interesting. They |
were msdly in love with each other when |
both contracts were signed. Did they eX- |
pect their ardOr to cool within six months
or year? Surely never were lovers so
wise and so foolish before. Did they
but 1t is useless to speculate. Mr.. Elkus
fis will not talk and his bride is not to be
seen.
The story of the signing of the queer
contracts remains to be told, however. and
1t is interesting, peculiar. almost uniqne
in its way. Attnrney-at-law and Notary
Public F. G. Mosebach of 325 Eighteenth
street tells it well: About month ago
they came to me-" he says, land wanted
me to draw up marriage contract for |
them. ! inquired their age. His was |
given as %. hers as q years. and to me
they looked it. They sat there (pointing) |
at the side of my desk and made violent |
love to each other while wrote"
Ii is well to mention, of course. that too
much reliance cannot be placed on Mr.. |
Mosebach'S use OF violent" in this connec-
tiOn. He is the father OF grown children |
"She was bright and witty and hand |
seme-a demi- blonde-and he was not
.unpreuOssess essing, though not tall of stat
ure. She dictated some Of the words of
the contract TO me, and when 1t was all
ready for signing they both insisted that
l. should put clause TO it limiting the
marriage, at the end OF which time 1t would
be dissolved by mutual consent and by the
terms of the instrument. L demurred TO
this: Then the lady explained TO me that
it really must be done that way. She said
Notary Higgins, relative OF the Gov
;erDor's private secretary, had drawn the
first contract for six months and that the
time would expire next day.
q 81 was astoGished. When l caught my
breath again l explained to the youngsters
that the one-yeaTclause would be a waste
of ink and time, for il would have no mean
ing in law. Still they insisted and l only
ceased to oppose it when they informed me-
confdentially that AN event was soon to
happen which made it very desirable th at
[ should throw no obstacles in the way of
their being remarked on their own terms
before the morrow.
81 did not share these fears as to the
event. for judged that Notary Higgins
contract had already made them man and
wife for all time. Yet / liked their con-
Germ over it and knew hat another con-
tract would not harm them.
They asked me not to publish it and |
refrained / have never seen them since,
but they are married for all time. know
it, fer ! witnessed the signing of one con-
tract. That is my legal opinion and my
common-sense point of view. They are
wed"
Still, there are those who differ from Mr.
Mosebach, and the indications are that
some of the best lawyers in town will be
engaged to show that he is wrong. Can