Arizona republican. [volume] (Phoenix, Ariz.) 1890-1930, 1893-11-04
A BRUTAL HUSBAND.
A Story of Cruelty Developed
in a Law Suit.
The Victim In the Case Is a N iece
and Beneficiary OF the Late
Senator Leland Stanford.
By the Associated Press.

BY the Associated Press
New YORK, Nov. 3.-Papers in an &C.
ton by Mrs. Christie Lathrop Cunning
a niece of the late Senator Stanford of
California and corroborative affdavits
together with statement by her coun
sci in supreme court chamber today
developed one of the most remarkable
cases on record. Judgement on one o.
the notes for $4,000 obtained from her
by her husband, led to today's proceed
ings. Lawyer Joseph B. Barcus ap.
peared for Mrs. Cunning and moved
that the judgment secured in Con
necticut by the Lincoln National Bank
of this city on January 2, 1898, and also
at Saratoga on February 6. 1891, be sci
aside.
BarcUs argued that the judgment
could not be collected, as Mrs. Gun.
ning's money was gone. Supplement.
airy proceedings were subsequently
brought to recover on the note and
Walter P. Butler was appointed re-
ceiver Of Mrs. Cummings property. 1t
was to prevent the receiver getting at
the legacy of 100000, left by Leland
Stanford, her uncle, that Lawyer Bar
Gus moved the judgments be set aside
in order to allow his client to come in
and defend the suit. Her defense is
that while she was under duress and
the bank had been notified before the
note in question was given, that notes
were being obtained from her by force.
Mrs. Cunning recites numerous acts
of cruelty on the part of her husband,
now dead, that made him appear in a
most unenviable light. Cunning ran
away from his wife and creditors in
November, 1888, with $4,000 of her
money. after squandering her fortune
of $25O,0OO. He was lost in snow
storm in the Andes mountains in May,
1889.
Mrs. Cummings affidavit stated that
four weeks after her marriage to Gun
ming he began threatening her and de-
spelling her of her property. He made
her an inmate of an insane asplum for
six weeks in Hartford, Conn. Mrs.
Cunning relates that on one occasion
when he wanted her to sign a note her
husband presented revolver at her
head. At another time he choked her
until she tainted. and once he knocked
her down and injured her spine. To
save her life she signed the notes in
thoee instances. On still another oc-
casion when she protested against sign
ing any more notes Cunning knocked
her down and grabbing her hands bent
her fingers back until the flesh was
torn. In October. 1887, Mrs. Cunning
says her husband leased farm of her
brother near Nowalk, Conn, and
locked it with thoroughbred horses.
He added 500 acres to 1t and sunk $780,
900 OF her meney.
On October 20, 1889. he told her he
wanted her to sign more notes and
when she refused he threatened to put
her in an insane asylum. He took her
to the Chemical National bank and she
there signed several notes including one
that figured in the suit against her.
Mrs. Cunning says she notified William
Cornell, cashier of the Lincoln National
bank of the duress she was under and
that she would not be responsible for
notes thus extorted from her.
Mrs. Cunning subsequently secured
a separation from her husband in Con-
neticut in February 1889. Ex-Judge
Noah Davis and Lawyer D. Gerber IN
opposition to the motion submitted the
affidavit of William 7. Cornell, in which
he denied that Mrs. Cunning notified
him che signed the note or any notes
while under duress. 1t was shown the
bank had discounted many notes of the
couple previous to the one involved in
the suit. The officers of the Lincoln
National bank denied that they had
any knowledge of the quarrels of the