Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1907-12-19

accompany him from New York 70
Albuquerque.
| Introducing her cross bill, the
plaintiff sets forth the following:
THAT at the city of New York on
the 18th day of October. 1905, this
| defendant first met plaintiff and at his
| requests and solicitations agreed to
and did marry this plaintiff on Oc-
tober 27, 1906, and that during the
| interim between October 13. 1906. and
| the date of said marriage this plain
tilt falsely and fraudulently repre-
sented himself to this defendant to be
Of reputable character and substan-
| tlal means, stating repeatedly to this
defendant that he was worth at least
three hundred thousand dollars
I ($3O0,000). when the fact was that he
was in an almost impoverished condi-
ton financially, and that he was
ready, able and willing to support the
defendant in manner such as she
had been accustomed to living and
was BETTING to her station in life. The
defendant says that these representa-
tons and other false and Fraudulent
representations hereinafter enumer
rated, were made to this defendant 10y
plaintiff as part of a scheme upon his
part to swindle and defraud this de-
fendant of her money and property,
and which this defendant respectfully
states was accomplished by the plain
tiff in the manner following:
The complaint then enumerates
separate instances in which Mr. Dar-
den is alleged TO have obtained large
sums of money for investment for the
plaintiff which it is alleged he In.
vested and holds in his own name
These sums, almost all of which are
alleged to have been for Investment in
New Mexico and Albuquerque real es
Al. A. Ii a. IL.
alleged to have been given, are as
follows:
On October 25, $4,000, alleged t.
have been secured on representation
that it would be invested i'm a profit |
able proposition in New Mexico. This |
sum, complaint alleges. was paid IN
cash check having been refused, the !
complaint continuing THAT this de |
fendant relying on the false ana !
fraudulent Misrepresentation of the !
plaintiff, gave to this plaintiff on or
about said day the sum of $4,000 in |
cash, to be invested for her in this en-
terprise-cash being demanded and |
check for said amount being refused
by this plaintiff-and upon the de-
livery of said money when she re-
quested plaintiff to give her receipt |
therefor the said plaintiff refused TO
do so. and this defendant upon In
formation and belief says that said in
Vestment of $4,000 was never made by |
this plaintiff for her in her name, or
for her use and Benefit and if made
at all was made by this plaintiff for
his own use and benefit and i'm his
name or otherwise with the object OF
cheating and defrauding this defend
ant of said sum of $4,000, and thar /
said plaintiff feloniously appropriated
said sum of money to his own use.
Then follows the charge that Ia
ha zln the 3nth 0HE !
Of October. 1906, Mrs. Darden paid
her husband the further sum OF
$4,000 for investment In New Mexico
real estate, the same charge as to its
being made.
That on the fifth of December,
1906, $1,000 was advanced TO be used
"in defraying the expenses incurred |
by one Kenneth Van Ripper, the son
OF this defendant, and this de-
PENDANT gave to the PLAINTIFF her /
check on the knickerbocker I
Trust company, and the proceeds
York and said check deposited /
by this plaintiff to the credit of his
own account In said knlckeroockSr
trust company, and the proceeds /
thereof, fraudulently and feloniously
by said PLAINTIFF to MS
own use and benefit"
That on December 81, 1906. Mrs.
Darden gave to her husband $35,OOO
for investment in New Mexico proper
ty AT per cent. the same charges as
to disposition being made. This sum
the complaint alleges, was invested by
Darden in his own name in the
Adams hotel property at Phoenix.
That on the 18th day of January,
1907. this plaintiff falsely and fraud
llently represented to this defendant
that he had oVerdrawn his account in
the KniokerbOcker Trust company IN
the sum of S21,300. and requested this
defendant to advance him said sum OF
money for the purpose of making
good this oVerdraft. AT the time
this plaintiff represented to the de-
fendant that he had overdrawn his
account with said knickerbOcker
Trust company in said sum of S2l.-
800. his said account was not over
drawn in that sum or any other sum
Of money whatsoever. and that his
statement TO that effect was but
false and fraudulent representation or
pretense whereby to deprive and de-
fraud this defendant of said sum OF
money and Of which sum of money
This defendant was defrauded.
Paragraph X Of the complaint sets
up that This defendant further says
that the marriage aforesaid between
This plaintiff and the defendant was
only a part of a false and fraudulent
concocted by this plaintiff for
the purpose OF depriving this defend
ant Of her property and not with
view to establishing a home or the
or maintenance of the
marital relations between the par
lies" the paragraph thereafter charg-
Ing desertiOn.
Paragraph l. represents that since
the marriage the plaintiff has ac-
luired large properties i'm sundry
places. "all Of which he took I'm his
own name and all of which he pur-
chased and procured with the money
SO falsely and feloniously obtained
from the defendant"
Paragraph NJ concludes THAT the
said defendant Is without remedy save
n a court Of equity and unless the
court intervene by its writs of injunc-
lion and a receiver. she viii be ire
parably injured because the plaintiff
win put the said properties so under
control out OF his hands and into
those OF innocent parties. and the
plaintiff Is unable to respond IN dam
ages commensurate with the sums or
money out OF which the defendant i
has been cheated and defrauded.
.sid plaintiff being worth, as defend
ant i informed and believes, In fixed
property not more than $1,000.
ALLEGED TO HAVE |