Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1908-07-26
So CoIored Man Gets Quick
Decree in Alexandria.
SUIT STILL PENDS HERE
Wife Wants Virginia Courts to Set
Aside Verdict.
OTHER TROUBLE MAY BE MADE
Judge Gould May Take Cognizance
Of Double Proceedings-Leeal
Problem to Be Solved,

When divorce comes hard in Washing
ton. don't wait for a decree-jump on a
trolley and get a quick divorce in Alex
andria.
That is the precedent established bv
William Edwards. colored, in solution Of
his marital troubles, after varied and
persistent efforts to quiet the pain at
tendant upon his perplexities And the
Alexandria court has granted him an alb.
solute divorce.
Still. the tangle Is not smoothed out
for a suit brought by Edwards against
his wife here in Washington Is still pend
ing. And there may be a pretty legal
problem for the lawyers
Alexandria says Edwards has no wife.
Washington says he has wife.
Can man divorced in Alexandria ex-
pect to sever the marital tie by continu-
ing a suit against the same woman in
Washington? What does he gain? This
Is the mix
Mrs. Mary Susan Edwards is not sure
as to her status. She bases her hopes in
the local courts. and has asked her at
torneys to have the Alexandria decree set
aside, as there Is the original unsettled
case In this city to be tried.
EDWARDS saved money.
Edwards was seen at the home of his
mother, 1851 4th street northwest, last
evening and talked freely about his mat
rimonial troubles. He was pleased at the
idea of the Alexandria court having act
ed so promptly upon his application for
divorce His troubles and court expe-
riences have been rather expensive.
Il did not move to Alexandra for the
purpose of getting the divorce there" he
declared. II moved there about the time
string to be away from the annoyances
the suit necessarily caused me.
when l moved to that city I had no
idea of filing a suit in the courts there.
to get a decree here. because of the ex-
pense, 1 concluded l would make the ef-
fort in Alexandria.
.'In my bill there did not allege what
did in this city, and thought 1t would
satisfy my wife. l understand she Is not
II paid s75 for taking testimony on my
side of the case in this city,, EdWaros
declared, land was told that the bill fol
the testimony taken on the other SIDE
would be about $120. That amount was
unable to pay.
Il had instructed my counsel to have
the suit dismissed, but was tod tna'
could not be done until all accounts were
settled. AS was unable to settle the &C
count l deemed 1t advisable to apply 1of
a. divorce in Alexandria
Edwards said he was pleased with MS
home in Alexandria and that It IS MS
intention to remain there: He expects
however that his wife will make a move
of some kind which will be the means OF
continuing the litigation.
White Man Implicated.
Attorneys Darlington and Truitt repre-
sented the woman In the divorce proceed
ings in Washington Edwards made an
effort to implicate a white man I'M the
case On behalf of the wife her attor-
neys summoned the business man to de-
fend his own reputation. He made posi-
tive denial Other witnesses gave cor
roborative testimony.
Testimony on both sides had not an
been submitted, and while the case was
pending here Edwards went to Alexandra
and procured a divorce.
1t is now the intention of counsel for
the woman to make application to the
Alexandria court to have the decree SCI
aside. The matter will be called to the
attention of Justice Gould as soon as the
summer recess Of the Supreme Court OF
the District is over.
The matter has attracted considerable
attention in legal circles. Attorneys on
both sides have shown more than ordi-
nary interest in the proceedings.
Justice Gould referred the case to Elk
aminer in Chancery LYMAN. The latter
was SO greatly annoyed before the case
was finished that the court permitted him
to withdraw and referSed the case to an
Attorneys Hughes and Gray represented
Edwards. During the taking of testimony
before Examiner Eynham in April, 1t IL
reported, the examiner and Attorney Gray
had a misunderstanding. Later they met
80 fIa al ~ q N RI.
ing. What passed between them was
followed by contempt proceedings insti-
tuted against the attorney.
Justice Gould heard the facts relating
to the contempt charge, took the matter
under advisement and finally determined
objected to serving further In the case
and was relieved.
Edwards Appeals to Alexandria.
Edwards then went to Alexandria and
employed Attorney Moncure to represent
him in divorce proceedings In that city
nothing being said by Edwards of the
case pending here. Counsel who appeared
for him in this city said last evening
they knew nothing of the proceedings in
Alexandria until after the divorce had
been granted.
Attorneys Darlington and Truitt were
surprised to learn that Edwards had
obt aimed a divorce. The wife or ex-wife
OF the colored man produced copy of the
paper containing such an announcement.
Il know he got the divorce down there.
she declared. because 1 heard all about
it and see 1t in the paper"
In order that there might be no mis-
take Attorney Truitt went to Alexandra
and consulted the records. He found that
the same William NJ Edwards, husband
of his client. had instituted proceedings
in the Alexandria court and had been sue
ceSsful.
The reasons set forth in the application
for legal separation were entirely diff
they were In this city. In the applica-
ton filed here, 1t is stated, the husband
had attacked his wifes reputation in
several ways. Desertion was the only
ground upon which the application was
made In Alexandria.
Mr.. Truitt returned with copy Of the
record of the court showing the divorce
had been granted upon the ground OF
desertion. the court concluding the order:
This decree Is final"
Wife Supposed to Have Disappeared.
In conversation with a Star reporter
last evening Mr.. Truitt said the testi-
mony given in Alexandria. as shown by
the record. was to the effect that persons
interested on the side of the husband did
not know of the whereabouts OF the wife
or that she was last seen in New Jersey
several years ago.
"The testimony in the case there" said
Mr.. Truitt, made a good enough show
ing for any court to have acted favor
ably upon the application"
The record Of the court. Mr.. Truitt said,
shows that the divorce was granted July
81 Mrs. Edwards attorneys said last