The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1895-04-17
A CUTTING SCANDAL
Christine Lullrs Wants a
Divorce From General
and Ex-CongressmaR
John T.
SAN FRANCISCO CAB EPISODE
Hard Times and q Block Of Bank
Stock-Forcible Denials and
Alimony Refused.
SAN FRANCISCO CAB EPISODE

NEW YORK, April Il, 1s95.-An appli-
carton was made to Judge Gildersleeve
in the Superior Couri today by Lawyer
Abe Hummel on behalf of Mrs. Christine
I.ilnrs Cutting for alimony and counsel
fees pending an action for separation
that she has brought against her nus
band, General John t. Cutting OF san
Francisco. The defendant is an ex-mem-
Der of Congress, a Brlgadier General Oh
Militia, has been Chairman OF the he
publican Congressional Committee and OF
the Republican State Committee OF Cali
fornia He is at present in TINS CITY.
He says he is here only for the purpose
of founding branch of the John l.
Cutting Company OF San Francisco. OF
which he IS President.
MRS. CUTTINGS ALLEGATIONS.
Mrs. Cutting says that she was mar
ried to the General in June. 1888 lie
told her that he was in good circunn-
stances and able to support her IN
proper manner. They came to this city
on wedding tour. and while here ne
is alleged to have represented TO hef
that business was in pad way, ana 10
have obtained from her for use IN me
business stock in the Sather Bankins
| S7.50G. He promised to pay her interest
on this stock, and she says that the
company have done SO. After getting
this stock. the plaintiff says her nus
| bonds conduct toward her altered. He
was cold and Indifferent to her. and
! finally when they returned to san Fran m
was brought home one night In a cap
intoxicated, by woman, whom he was
caressing and addressing ia endearing
On November 80 he left her and came
| to New York. She followed. and mad
a t{1,1rn md
brought. Mrs. Cutting alleges. that her
husband said that he would support
| her but that they must live apart, and
sent She says that she is without means,
| that she has been resident here Tor
fourteen months, and she asks la that ,n,i 1her
and to give her the means to prosecute
THE DEFENDANTS REPLY.
Delaney Nicoll appeared for the de-
| fendant He at once raised the cues
| tion of jurisdiction, and said that his
client was not resident here; ne e. pSr Sra nad
| of the business. He also claimed that
| this was not the residence OF the plain
| the past fourteen months, and had regis
F.! Cutting, San Francisco.
| ting was a woman of wealth. while the
! defendant had but $1,000 q year, out OF
which he was compelled TO pay for the
stsso VIE It !. aleged th;sste 4 he laserss.
| in properties in San Francisco was S41.-
| $780, which yielded her an income OF al
| least $1,000 q year. He said that his
wife was much better able TO prosecute
her own suit than ne was.
| The defendant denied that he ever con-
| sorted with common women or that he
ever was brought home :ntoxicated by a
| woman. He charges that his wife has
| abused him. and that she is addicted to
| the use of profane and obscene language
1 (ril6eTSleayA said
| the rule Of the court not to allow ali
moly in separation cases, especially
when the cases We're soon to be broughf
to trial, and that he did not think thai
he would depart from the rule in this
| case. On the question of counsel fees
| he said he would reserve decision.