The weekly register. [volume] (Point Pleasant, Va. [W. Va.]) 1862-1909, 1896-03-25
I'M HIGH LIFE.
Mg. Charlotte Drayton Obtains q
Decree ON Ground of Desertion.
wILITHIs END THE SCANDAL
rte Cbanee.ior In Granting the Decree
says 1T rs Impossible TO Escape
the Conviction That tho Husband
Had Grounds For Suspicion.


TRENTON, March 23. Sancellor Nc
Gill fled decree gray ing an absolute
divorce to Mrs. Charlotte Drayton from
j. Coleman Drayton on the ground OF
desertion. Mrs. Drayton is the daugh.
tor of the late William Astor. None OF
the evidence taken in the case is on file
in the chancery clerk Is office, all being
in the possession of the chancellor. In
the beginning the decree says:
"It is impossible to escape the con-
viction that the defendants suspicious
of his wife's infidelity We're not dest1-
tnte of foundation in questionable cir
cumstances at least, but / fail to find
any judicial precedent which holds that
under statute similar to that OF this
state q husband may with impunity be
guilty 6f desertion of his wife merely be-
cause he believes her, even under grave
ly suspicious circumstances, to have
been guilty of adultery"
eiHDesertion, ~ the chancellor holds, lis
justified only when it was shown by
clear and satisfactory proof that the de-
,serting party has been so offended
against as to authorize at his instance a
decree of divorce or judicial separation,
"If the defendant would rely upon
against her charge of desertion, he must
prove it. There is 10 evidence that 1T
was the intention of the defendant at
the time he left the petitioner to insti-
tute suit for divorce on the ground OF
adultery He did, i'll fact, commence
such n suit in June, 1894, u time so re-
mote from the commencement of tho
separation that more than the period
prescribed by law in which desertion
must continue to constitute n cause for
divorce had interviewed, and thereby a
cause for divorce had become available
to her, and even after the lapse OF that
time his suit was not prosecuted with
diligence.
"a mere institution of suit on the
ground of adultery Will not avail as a
defense to suit for divorce on the
ground of descrtion. The adultery must
be proved It was the husbands duty
to act expeditiously SO that his wife
should not remain longer than necessa-
rily required, if,guily, unconvicted, and
If innocent understhe shadow of such a
scandalous and disgraceful charge"
The chancellor finds that there was
no collision on the part OF the husband
and wife to secure a. divorce, and says
that the mere fact that both desired to
be divorced does not constitute collu-
sion. There must be an agreement.
III the decree reference to the testi-
mony is made, but the chancellor docs
not mention Hallett Alsop Borrowe by
name.
zone b, a neighbor," is, however, re-
ferred to, and this conc b" is men
toned as having been named as core
spondent i'll tho suit brought by Dray-
ton against his wife. Borrowc was CO.
respondent in that suit.
In reviewing the testimony the chan
cellor says it appeared that Drayton
questioned his wifes fidelity. while they
were living at Bernardsville, i'll this
state, and that she then Went to her
fathers home. This was in October,
1891. In November npartialreconcilia-
ton was effected and MIR. and Mrs.
Drayton went to. England, but only
acted toward each other as nominally
man and wife.
While in England, the chancellor says,
the estrangement widened ana Mrs.
Drayton, according to her own testi-
mony, became unhappy and miserable
and determined that separation was nee
essary. Having no one in whom to con-
fide she photographed to America for "B, I"
and he met her at London hotel, where
arrangements; had boon made for her'to
meet an American lawyer. The lawyer
was late i'll arriving, and Mrs. Drayton
and "B" went into another room, where
they had lunch, n waiter being i'll the
room with them. While they were in
this room Drayton and two men, pre-
sumably detectives, entered and 1dentl-
fed her, afterward departing. After
ahis i'll accordance with an arrangement
between her lawyer and her husbands
lawyer, Mrs. Drayton went to Wimble-
don to bid her children goodbye. She
then went to Paris to meet her father,
who persuaded her to seek a reconcilia-
ton for the sake of the children.
Tho chancellor says heis satisfied that
this effort at reconciliation was made in
good faith by Mrs. Drayton, but was re-
iected by her husband because of his
Continued belief in her unfaithfulness.
He points out that the legal time for
bringing suit for desertion had elapsed
and that the desertion was willful, con
tinued and obstinate. The only point.
he says, was whether the desertion was
iustifiable. He refers to the fact that
the husbands suit for divorce on the
ground of adultery was not brought un-
til June, 1894, and that since that time
no proof of the adultery had been adj
duced and that i'll the present suit tho
husband made no charge of adultery,
but contented himself with a denial of
the desertion.
shenango No. Released.