The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1899-08-26
NO CLAIM ON HUSBANDS TRUST.
Justice Russell Decides Against Mrs. Rob
bort l.. Rende.

Robert J.. Reade placed about $4,000 in
trust In October. 1896. six months after his
marriage to Martha A. Reade. by the terms OF
which he was to have the income for life and
$1,000 year from tho principal II no chose to
draw it, unless he deserted his wife, in which
case each was to have half OF the income and
drawings OF $1,000 year from the principal.
Concerning this agreement. Justice Russell Of
tho Supreme Court said yesterday in a decision
constituting It:
Presumptively II was prompted by the con-
sciousness of the plaintiff that he was not then
fully competent to independently manage his
own affairs. and by the probable insista,cc Of
his wife.
In February. 1897. at the instance of his
wifo, Heade was taken TO a sanitarium suffering
from excessive indulgence in liquor and choral.
Thereafter he was declared to be incompetent
and was sent to Dloomingdale Asylum. his
wife being made committee Of his person and
property. He was discharged from Blooming
dale in November 1897. cured. and wrote to
his wife. thanking her for having him incar-
cerated and asking that they again live to-
gethsr. She did not answer the letter and has
since refused TO live with Reade. He claimed
the income and $4,000 Of the principal of tho
fund. but Mrs. Roale protested to tho CONT
mental Trust Company, which Is trustee OF tho
that they must now share the fund and in
come. In Reade's action. which has Just been
decided by Justice RUSSELL to recover the in
come and $4,000. Mrs. Russell made the same
answer. 1t appeared that Resde had bought
His wife house. 15S West Eighty nth street.
and furnished IL at an expense Of $4,000, and
that she still has this property The Justice
says:
Tho wltul deserton. as charged 10y her. con-
stats in the plaintiff going to the retreat under
her advice his being confined in Bloomngdale
Asylum as a lunatic at her instance, and the in
ability to live with her in her house since he
emerged from that place on account OF her
distinct refusal.
While it is very true that marriage de-
volved upon him the duty OF furnishing tho
necessaries Of life. to sustain tho wife in the
physical comforts essential to her station,
and also to treat her with respect
and tender Css, corresponding duty
comes to the wife herself to care for that hus-
band in sickness and In health in the compan-
ionshlp Of a life lived together and not asunder;
| to assist him with her help in the conduct Of a
progressive lio, thus confirming. If the
| occasion requires. resolutions to that end on
his part. unless the com panionship Is such that
! no self-respecting woman can live in the daily
observance Of its duties. Thore is no evidence
In TINS case Whatever 10 JUSTIFY tho conclusion
! that the wife could not properly live with her
| husband since his return from the asylum
Mrs. Reado made further claims for money
advanced for necessAries for herself, mainly
while her husband was in the sanitarium OF
| asylum. parts OF which are allowed by the
Court. The Justice says. however that Mrs
| Reade is not entitled to maintenance since she
refused to live with hor husband.
| The defendant is the second wife OF Readc
who is a lawyer. hut who has not practised FOL
several years. His first wife was Josie Mans,
| field. whose name figured in the FiskStokes
murder case. but they were divorced in 1885
| Reade inherited a large estate from his father
! Robert Rcade. who died in 1888.