The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1899-10-16
She Was Granted a Separation and Allow
ancs Of $500 a Year In 1894.
THE AMOUNT NOW DUE ABOUT $4,000
CiansIcn Is Charged With Sqgandidng Large sums
on Ano her NhiIs Wife and Daughter hcSi
Young Woman, Are N He'd.

New York. oct. 16.-James II. Grams
ton, hotel proprietor, has for years
neglected to pay his wife, Phoebe a.
Cranston. the alimony that Is due h''
under a decree of separation granted 80
her on June 29 1894 and he has Deeh
alrected TO show cause why he Should
not be punished for contempt.
Arrears OF ahmony now amount 10
about $4,000. Mrs Cranston by the de-
cree was granted $500 annual alimony
for the support of herself and her
daughter. Phoebe Elizabeth Cranston'
then a young woman soon 10 reach het
majority
Although Mrs. Cranston has made re-
peated efforts 70 force her HUSBAND To
pay the sums directed she has been ui-
successful. ana now she has taken sum-
mary steps to compel him TO obey the
order OF the court.
PROPRIETOR OF HOTELS.
Mr. Cranston gained his reputation
as the proprietor OF the New York no.
tel. which was situated at Broadway
and Fourth street. lie is now manager
OF CranstOn's hotel at CranSton' son
the Hudson. and OF the Avon hotel. At
is I'm command OF "A large salary and is
possessed OF property the income OF
which is more than sufficient to pay
her the alimonv due.
Their marriage took place on Janu-
airy /. 1869. at Berlin. Rensselaer, coun-
ty, and some wears later they came 10
this city. when he assumed the pro-
prietoi-ship Of the New York hotel
They were happy until 1880 when, she
Inf. = -
OF the patrons OF the hotel. upon whors
he bestowed costly presents. Mrs
Cranston sued him for a separation,
and on the report of James r.. Cunning
as referee. Judge Dugro gave her a
decree. The referee in his report stated
that he regretted she had not sued for
an absolute divorce.
NEGLECTED WIFE FOR ANOTHER
Evidence AT the time showed that he
neglected his wife and daughter for
the young woman who had won his af-
fections. His wife appealed to him "a
give her uD. II was in vain. as he Is
said TO have told her he had ceased tt
love her.
Their apartments in the hotel were
changed. and from that time his atten
tions were more noticeablv bestowed or
the woman who had gained contro
have purchased a handsome residenc
in the upper part of the city, whicl
was furnished luXuriouslv.
Relations between himself and hi
wife and daughter became SO stralne
that he forbade them TO take thei
meals in public dining room of hot,
and had them sent TO their rooms
Finally he obtained apartments 70
them in Washington place and allowe
i- xrf In "a - Ia
food. which was supplied from the hC
tel
Mrs. Cranston. becoming III on Jun
"a. 1890. went ia her husbands hote
at Cranston's. for the benefit Of he
health. but the dav after her arrivs
she received this note from him:
Mrs. j. H. Cranston:
81 learned through G.. r. Cranstnn
that YOU are al Cranstons contrary
10 my wishes expressed to YOU I
have provided a home for YOU at
No. Is Washington place. which YOU
left without nly knowledge. give
you "a hours to leave Cranston's."
She immediately returned to this cit,
and soon after brought her suit IA
separation. She charged that he ha,
squandered his money on the youn.
woman whom he admired and neglect
ed his business. Mr.. Cunning. the ref
cree i'm his rfnort said: "He ha
thrown off and dlsregarded all the ob
legations and duties OF husband 70
ward his wife and has ceased TO liv,
with her as a husband and his who'll
conduct IL without Justification and I,
due TO no fault or neglect on her part.
Mrs. Cranston says that while shq
and her daughter are both I'm need no,
husband has "A large income. bur ner-
sistently refuses 10 orovide for them
in accordance with the order OF the
court.