Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1899-12-01
SUITS FOR $4,000 EACH.
Charles II. Clark and Henry G. Clark
the Defendants.

Fred II. Durgin Charges the Former
with alternating the Affections OF His
VIE, and the Latter with Assisting
Him aud Encouraging Mrs. Durgin
TO Leave Home.
Fred Il. Durgin has brought suits for
$4,000 each against Charles II. Clark and
Henry G.. Clark. The former is charged
with alternating the affections of Mr.. Dur
gins wife, May Richards Durgn, and the
latter with assisting in the alienation and
encouraging Mrs. Durgin to leave her
home. Papers were served on the Messrs.
Clark, son and father, at the well-known
Clark farm, Wednesday, by Deputy Sheriffs
Mcclure and Starkey. Bail was promptly
furnished in the sum of $4,000 for each
by George II. Clark, grandfather and
father Of the defendants in the case.
The case will be tried at the March term
OF the Windham county court. Mr.. Dur
gin has retained Haskins & Schwenk and
Waterman & Martin as his attorneys.
The writ is of the stereotyped form, and
in addition TO the charge of alienation Of
affections alleges that improper relations
have existed between the younger Clark
and Mrs. Durgin.
The bringing of the suit has caused an
unusual local sensation on account of the
prominence of the people involved. The
Durgins came here from Winchendon,
Mass, several years ago, and Mr.. Durgin
was proprietor of a drug store until last
September, when the foreclosure of a
mortgage held by his mother-in-law, Mrs.
George Richards of Winchester, n. II. for
merly Of Brattleboro, resulted in q petition
in bankruptcy being signed by Mr.. Durgln.
NJ mv.A 81. t..,
portant part in leading social events of the
town since coming here, Mrs. Durgin be-
| ing particularly active in this direction.
Mrs. Durgin has lived most of the time
the past two months at the Clark farm, Wis
iting occasionally with her parents in Win
chester. Mr. Durgin has occupied rooms
in Crosby block as heretofore, and it is
understood that he has made repeated I'M
successful attempts to have his wife re-
| turn TO live with him.
When Henry Clark was asked yesterday
in regard to the suit he said he had no in
! timation that 1t was 10 be brought until
| the papers were served, and It was a com
! plete surprise TO him. He thought the
suit amounted TO a blackmailiug scheme,
and expressed great confidence in proving
| the charges unfounded. He dsclamed en-.
tirely any wrong or unwarranted action
on his own part. He said there had
been trouble between Mr.. and Mrs. Dur
gin, but he had advised Mrs. Durgin tC
live with her husband If she could. His
children and Mr. and Mrs. Durgin had al
ways been intimate, and any action taken by
his family since the trouble arose between
the Durglns was only such as was like
ly TO happen where families were on friend.
ly terms. Mr.. Clark has retained c. G
Fits as counsel.
A subpoena was served Wednesday night
on Chas. A. Risbey of New York, Henry
Clark's son-in-law, on his arrival here
He was called upon to give deposition
today, but by mutual consent the testimony
was taken yesterday before Lawyer II. G
Barber, Mr.. Rlsbey being obliged to return
TO his work in New York today.