The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1901-11-13
MRS. LOTARY WINS.
Vice Chancellor Decides Her
Case Against Her Hus-
band il Her Favor
on Every Point.

In the Court of Chancery this morning
Vice Chancellor Pitney made Lawyer Al
fred Lotary of Hoboken appear meaner
than short pint of peanuts. The Court
decided the case which Mrs Julia Lotary
brought against her husband in the COM
plainant's favor and in lengthy verbal
opinion handled the defendant without
gloves. In Mrs Lotary's bill she alleges
her husband compelled her to give him
deed to her property in Hoboken py
threatening to blow his brains out II she
didn't The Court declared the deed 70
the husband null and void and also
directed the husband to give to the vile
thes furniture in their fiat in Hoboken.
In the opinion the Vice Chancellor re-
viewed the testimony. He told how Mrs.
Lotary's father gave her dowry Of
$4,000 when she was married, but sald
that the evidence showed that this money
was given to Mrs. Lotary and not 20 ner
husband The Court said he believed Mfs.
I.otary's story of the circumstances un-
der which she transferred the property
to her husband. He referred to the scene
in Hoboken which Mrs. Lotary's parents
and brothers made when they learned
that Lotary was not supporting his wife;
that she had turned over her properly
to him. and he was collecting the reuts
hut MT having the interest on the mort
cages. After this Mrs. Lotary went nome
with her parents who, considering that
her husband was not able to support her,
thought it but just that she should re-
main with them.
In speaking of the action of Mrs.
T,otar, In making the deed to her nus
hap der duress, the Court said It was
IL <of a young, inexperienced woman
under the dominant influence OF her nus
band lawyer It was altogether the
act of the husband, an exercise OF m
fiuence which the law says husband
can abuse. The Court considered the
deed a temporary agreement so that me
husband could gain control Of the prop
erty.
..There is no reason" said the Court,
"why these two people shouldn't live to-
gether happily as husband and WIFE
The Court then reviewed the testimony
Of their courtship and said: With COM
mendable prudence Mr. Lotary wanted
to find out how much money there was
in ii if he married the girl. That's PLAN
talk, but the question of money has mace
all the trouble in this case
The Chancellor said testimony had been
introduced to show that the marriage
was to follow the Jewish custom, Whlch
gave the wife's dowry to the husband.
THAT CUSTOM declared the Court us
contrary to AnglolSaxon notions and
ideas Of decency in this country. we
don't pay men to marry our daughters,
but give the money to our daughters.
am one who believes that man should
marry a woman for merit and not for
money Then the Court commented on
the testimony that Lotary was In hurry
to get married, and said
sI don't blame. I can sympathze with
him after seeing the young lady. She
certainly is attractive.
At this the fair complainant biushed
becomingly and smiled a pleasant smile.
s.That reminds me-" the Court went on.
.of the young lady who when her fiancee
asked her if she would rather be married
in May or June said, What's the matter
with April .
Lotary's claim was that the property
which his wife conveyed to him was
originally his and that he had put it in
her name because he did not want to go
bail for his clients This excuse, the
Court said, was absurd as there was a
statute against lawyers becoming bail
for his clients. In commenting on Lotarys s
claim that his wife deserted him the Vice
Chancellor said that her leaving him
as she did did not constitute desertion.
He was apparently unable to support her
in the way a gentleman of the New Jer-
sey bar should support his wife and she
was justified in going to her parents.
Mrs Lotary's father feeling thanked
the Court when the decision was an
nounced and Mrs. Lotary herself smiled
upon the Vice Chancellor most sweetly.