Willmar tribune., 1907-11-27
MRS. HARTJE WINS -.
Complete |: VICTORY
SUPERIOR COURT IN UNANIMOUS
OPINION ExoNERATEs WOMAN
FROM UGLY CHARGES.
MILLIONAIRE SPOUSE
MUST DEFRAY COSTS
Tribunal Affirms Decision Of Lower
Courts, and Denies Husbands Pc
titions to Reopen Case-charqes Of
Misconduct Are Flimsy.

Philadelphia, Nov. 22-Mrs. Mary
Scott Hartje, who was sued for d.
vorce by her husband, F. Augustus
Hartje, the Pittsburg millionaire, won
complete victory in the Pennsylva-
MIA superior court here Thursday when
that tribunal affirmed in it's entirety
the decision of the Allegheny county
court, which refused to grant Hartje
a divorce. The petitions filed by Hart
je's attorneys asking the superior
court to reopen the case on the ground
of newly discovered evidence were de-
MED.
The petitions to reopen the case
were based on letters alleged to have
been written by Mrs. Hartje to Thom-
as Nadine, the family coachman, who
Is named as correspondent by Hartje.
Decision Is Unanimous.
The decision, which was written by
Judge Beaver and concurred in by the
other six members of the court, says:
"We have given careful considera-
tfon to the evidence in this case. It
is of two kinds: The evidence of SER
wants employed, and friends of the
family. With the exception of single
witness this testimony is not only
not convincing but is scarcely sufficient
to arouse even a suspicion of improper
relation between the respondent and
the correspondent. The excepted wit
ness is Susie Wagner. She was evil
IDENTIFY strongly prejudiced witness.
She was brought from Germany by
Hartje and was met on her arrival in
New York by him and his counsel.
Her testimony to say the least must
be received not only with care but
with suspicion, and such founded
doubt as to preclude conclusion such
as we are asked to deduce from it,
In discussing the letters which have
figured in the case the decision dis
misses all but one with scant consider
alton, and in discussing the one re-
tanned, the decision says:
Letters Are Doubted.
IF the testimony of those who are
familiar with the handwriting of Mrs.
Hartje has any value, it would seem
as if the experts, and there are rumors
that 1t was not written by the re-
spondent, should be taken of such cor
roborative force as to make the genu-
ineness of this letter very doubtful.
We reach the conclusion that the al
legations of the Hbellant are not sus-
tanned by evidence. The trial judge
was not satisfied with the evidence
and we are not satisfied. We agree
with the conclusions reached by the
trial Judge in many Of the reasons
stated by him in dismissing the suit
for divorce.
after this case was appealed a
petition was presented on behalf of the
libellant, praying this court to reopen
the case on the ground of newly dis
covered evidence. The petition was
accompanied by the affidavit of the
libellant but is not Supported by the
af11davits of witnesses as to what
their testimony would be or as to the
manner in which the alleged docu.
mentary evidence was procured. AS
to the alleged facts to be proved by
the correspondent, his testimony, if cor
rectly represented in the petition,
must necessarily start with declar-
alton which would utterly discredit
him as witness and would lead only
to the eliminating of his testimony al
ready taken, which, If done, would
not, In our opinion, materially change
the general aspect of the case and
would not lead to any different re-
sult.Y
Hartje Must Pay Cost.
1--WE have considered the aff1davits
of the mother and sister of the alleged
correspondent filed in the petition, but
can find nothing in it or them which
leads US to change our conclusion or
warrants us in granting the prayer
Of the petitioner. The prayers of the
several petitions for suspending the
case are denied"
The costs of the proceeding are
placed on Hartje.
Loved Dulcet Phone Voice.
p}ohnord Uo Nov % IT. ~,oe