The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1899-02-06
MINISTER )
ISSUED.
Wife of Rev. DR.. DuHanl.
mel Brings Actionfor +
Divorce.

New York, Feb. 5-Rev. DR., William
Du Hamel, who for five years WAS rector III
the Church Of st. Augustine, Of Trinity
parish, at No 1917 East Houston street, but
whose services wore dispensed with tnore
In July last, whom his domestic troubles
were made public. Is now being sned by
his wife. Mrs. Florence Du Hamel for an
absolute divorce Judge Bookstavor yes
terday granted an order for the service OF
the summons In the action by publication
on the clergyman. Ho Is said to be liviag'
at Rohoboth, Del, whore no has been since
last August. During the summer no lived
there in u tent
f,Dr DuHamels father was also c!ergy.
man having a charge In Maryland Dr.
DuHamel was married In Philadelphia on
October 8, 1889. While In this city he and
his wife resided at No Barrow Street.
Dr. DuHamel, In addition to his minis-
terial Gutles, ed!ted religions paper
known as Church Bells. His wife says
she was compelled to leave him on April
2l last because Of his cruelty,
Sho charged, In a suit for separation that
she then brought. that no had beaten her,
and had threatened her life with revolver
AMI also largo knife.
In that action, although he denied heP
ACQUISITIONS, Judge Pryor allowed her ali.
mony OF SIS weekly. Falling to collect
her alimony proceedings to sequostrats
his property were brought in the name Of
his wife, but without realizing sufficient
TO meet her claim. Mrs. DuHamol now
charges that since her former action was
brought she has discovered evidence OF her
husbands misconduct during last sum-
mer with two women, and sh, asks the
Court for an absolute divorce,
Leonard D. Baldwin. who represents this
wife. presented the following letter to the
Court written by the minister last month
In reply to an inquiry as to his troubles
with hi, vito, showing hat while he re.
side ) In Delaware ho has mado arrange
mcnts TO have his mail sent to Jersey
City,
Jersey City, Jan. 10. \
DEAR SIR:-Your favor reached me at
length in a roundabout course. l had
panuel for oil such communications. I
do not see any need for any such interview
as you suggest Anything you have to
propose can be made through my attorney.
There was i time when l beloved in set
thing matters amicably, but you saw h5
to take another courte which ruined ms
financially AMI ciorically, but 1t was OF no
advantage to you o. your client.
could have pressed the advantage, and
was SO advised but have no desire for q
divorce. 1t means nothing to me but legal
protection, ana do not desire to bring
the woman truly and faithfully Lowell in-
to any mora dlsreputo than nor reckless
and Maynard course compcl5. Now She
wants divorce so that she may marry
the man who came into my home when no
was down and who repaid my kindness
with tho gratitude Of viper. II this ID
not true let her 60 and llva with her re!a-
tives and give up all association with this
fellow. II shc does so l will provide for
her when get on my feet.
If she wants to marry him let her plead
lUT u ulNUICo Ou eAp 6touhu ~ "So''s'NN
and nor support and will not defend ittt
| know what You want 70 communicate,
and tho proof you think you have, and 5
know 1t won't stand because 1t is untruo.
and the party has stated what Is true to
others and her purposes in bartcring with
you. Finally, let me tell ycu that | am
not an enemy of Mr.. Du Hanoi. That I
have no d sire for vengeance nor do res
pay hate for hate.
know in what general disrepute sho was
and am sorry for it anl woulI shield her
any way could. II she has anything 10
propose let her write 1t to me frankly. II
it is to be legal with her, then do you com.
municato with Mr. Ware. ] have no fav.
ors to ask and nothing to lose now l am
not depending on tho ministry. but am
working humbly and honestly at the
printers trade, which fortunately I had
learned. have no Grudgo against you,
but am sorry you did not take up with my
original offer. IT would have simp,!fied
everything.
Yours, &c, WILLIAM DU HAMEL
Dr.. Du IIamcl's refsrsnc, to the "viper"t
in his letter is concerning one Thomas X.
Dukehart, a salesman, who was boarder'
in his house When the Clergyman was
sued for separation he made counter
charge for divorce, bringing in this
mans name In his charges. Mrs Du
IIamel declared that this charge was false