Evening journal., 1908-09-01
FREDERICKS'
CASE In COURT
Defendant Held in $500 Bail
For Appearance at Upper
Tribunal
ALLEGED HE THREATENED
TO LEAVE THE CITY


After several fragmentary hearings in
the case Of Arthur Frederlclzs OF this city,
who is charged by his wife Mrs. Margaret
Frederlcks, with not supporting her, IL
was given a final hearing in city Court
this morning before Judge Cochran, and
Fredericks was ordered to furnish 5000
bail for his appearance in the Upper
Court.
This is a second time that Frederichs
has been charged with non-support. The
FIRST was some while ago when he was
given hearing before Judge Cochran on
a charge Of assault mad battery that was
later changed 10 one Of non-support, and
the court disposed Of the case by ordering
Fredericks to pay certain sum OF money
at stated intervals to Mrs FredericlSs.
Got a Second Warrant
The second warrant was sworn out Au-
gust G. The case since that date had been
continued from day 70 day because the
vacation season made inroads in the per-
sonnel OF the court, and Il was not
thought best to dispose OF the case til
those who had had the handling OF it at
the first trial. and who were supposed TO
understand the circumstances, were re-
turned
Attorney j. Frank Bah. who represented
Frodericks, had been clammoring right
along for a hearing, as he alleged that
the second warrant against his client was
a farcial document when he had receipts
TO show that the decrees of the court
appertaining TO what Fredericks' should
pay his wife, had been followed and that
there was no foundation al all for the
second charge being brought
/ AS the matter had been arranged the
money was TO be paid through Agent
Stout. Attorney Ban had the receipts in
court this morning and read them. They
/ showed that up 70 August 4. the stipula-
tion of the court had been followed. Since
that time, Mr.. Ball said he had had the
money for Mrs. Fredencks but that the
intermittent absenses Of Agent Stout, pre-
vented the money being paid through him
70 Mrs. FredericlSs.
According 70 the testimony Of Mrs
Fredericks. the second warrmt was swori
out because She had been told she al
legged. by her husband and by friends
that he was going 10 leave the city.
Received No Money.
Mrs. Fredericks, who is a pretty youni
woman, tall and slender. after beini
sworn, told her story to the court. sh,
said 1t was a month ago to-day that she
had received no money. She and her hus
band have not been living together since
the first of last June, she said and fur.
ther added that he recently told her she
better drop the case against him. as. sh,
alleged, he was going to leave the city
Mrs. Fredericks married her husband
two years ago in a little town a few miles
out Of Baltimore and they came TO VII.
mington last March. They have lived in
Washington street Tatnall street. ant
East Seventh street at different periods
up to June when they separated.
Mr.. Ball cross-examined the witness. He
drew out the fact that Mrs. Frederick.
had received support after the separation
and while she was boarding with a friend
and exhibited receipts showing that money
had been paid to Mrs. Fredericks.
When asked why the warrant had beer
made out she said that her husband hat
threatened to leave the city.
The warrant Mrs. Fredericks testified
had been made out through the agency
of Mr.. Stout and not Chief OF Polio'
Black.
Mr.. Ball Produced Receipts.
Mr.. Ball then read the receipts showing
that money had been paid by Frederick
to his wife. The terms Of agreement cs1le,
for the sum Of s. per week to be paid OF
the first and fifteenth Of each month.
Up to August Z. Mr.. Ball showed tha
the money had been received. On Angus
G the warrant had been made out by Mrs
Fredericks and at that time her husban'
was brought into court. Then ii was tina
Mr.. Ball demanded an immediate hearing
He said it was the most absurd proceeding
to bring his client to court when he ha,
proof that Fredericks had lived up 4
what the court had already ordered him e
do. The case went over, however, for th
reasons that have been stated
Mr. Ball reiterated this morning wha
he believed to be an unheard Of metho,
Of procedure against his client.
"what rule" he said. "can the cour
find that will authorize the holding o
this man a moment longer"
The city solicitor said that he did no
sec how the case differed from any othe
in which a charge of non-support is mad
and said that he believed the court shoui'
either dismiss It. or else hold II for fe up
per court.
This woman" said the city solicitor
"says that this man is going 10 get out o
town as soon as he is released and I be
lieve he should be held for the uppe
court"
Judge Cochran then fixed bail at $500 70
Frederexs appearance.