The San Francisco call., 1897-04-29
HELLMAN'S QUEER PLIGHT
He Thought He Was Divorced
and Married Another
Woman.
Fraud Was Used and the Grand Jury
Will Investigate Who Is
to Blame.

Charles HelIman came from st. Louis a
few days ago and surrendered himself to
the police, as he wanted to secure vindi-
cation, which he got from Judge Low
yesterday afternoon.
Heliman unfortunately is in an awkward
predicament. through no fault of his own.
He was divorced in January. 1895. married
another girl a few months later ana now
it seems he was not legally divorced and
his present wife and her child have legally
no claim upon him.
Hellman and his first wife mutually
agreed to a divorce, and in November,
1894, they went to George w. Howe, who
advertises that divorces are a speciality
with him. In due time Heiiman secured
the divorce from Judge Trout, and was
surprised to learn a few weeks ago that he
was wanted here on two charges OF perjury,
for having sworn before a notary public,
when signing the divorce com plant, that
he and his wife had been living apart for
one year, and for having sworn to the
same effect before f. W. Lawler. COM
missioner appointed by the Supreme
Court to take evidence in the case.
The complaining witness in the case
was John Pearson, Precita avenue, who
lived next door 10 Hellman and his wife
before the divorce proceedings were COM
menced.
The cases came up before Judge Low
yesterday afternoon and Attorneys George
ii. Reid and Lemon appeared in behalf of
Hellman.
Pearson and his wife were in court and
testified to the fact that Hellman and his
wife were living together till within three
or four weeks of the divorce proceedings.
In his evidence Hellman related how he
went to Howe by seeing his advertise ment
in the papers. They talked the matt er
over and Hellnan said Howe wanted him
TO get two or three friends who would tes-
tify that he and his wife had been living
apart for a year, but Hellman told him he
knew no one who would do that, and, be-
sides, 1t was not true.
He called upon Howe several times and
finally, he said, Howe got him to sign a
paper. He denied ever going before Com
missioner Lawler and never saw that gen.
tleman, who was in court, in his life. At
torney Lawler gave his evidence and
failed to identity Hellman as the husband
who gave evidence before him.
Hellman finally got his decree of di-
vorce from Howe and thinking 1t was all
right he waited for few months and got
married again.
A witness in the divorce case was 10
Drake, who swore that Heliman and his
wife had been living apart for year, but
Heliman swore he did not know such q
man and never heard of him before.
Attorney Reid said that if what He'll
man testified to We're true the divorce was
null and void, as it had been obtained by
fraud on some ones part, and Hellman's IS
second marriage was illegal.
Howe took the stand and made a gem
eral denial of the statements made by
Heilman. He said HeIlman had sworn
before the notary public and before the
Com missioner tina. he had not been liv-
ing with his wife for year prior to the
commencement of the suit, and when he
found he had sworn falsely he wanted
him to suffer for perjuring himself.
Judge Low said he believed every word
that Hellman said and he would dismiss
the charges against him. 1T is infa.
nous" continued the Judge, "that such
practices should be permitted, and some