Los Angeles herald., 1909-12-04
WANTS MARRIAGE
BONDS RELEASED
WIFE DENIES SHE KNEW SUP
POSED HUSBAND MARRIED
SPOUSE DECLARES WOMAN HAD
KNOWLEDGE OF IMPEDlMENT
Legal Proceedings and Conferences of
D Two Months End in Divorce Court.
Judge Takes Case Under
Amusement

Denials by Mrs. Ada Kirkpatrick
Leo that she knew Count NJ. Francis
Leo was a married man when she be
came his wife in Washoe county, Ne
vada, April q, 1908, and assertions by
Leo she did have this knowledge, but
overrode his objections to a weddir ;
by her impatience and ardent love, en-
tered into the testimony yesterday in
Mrs Leo's suit against Leo for an
annulment of the marriage.
The troubles of the couple We're
brought to the trial stage in Judge
Houser's divorce court yesterday after
two months or more occupied in legal
proceedings and conferences in an et-
fort to arrange the financial end OF
the suit. Money matters We're settled
out of court, Mrs. Leo agreeing to ac-
cept $1,000 in money and withdrawing
her demand for a court order COM
pelling her husband to give her q
monthly allowance Of $3.50 during the
remainder of her life.
The couple were married in Reno.
New, April 81, 1908, and Mrs. Leo filed
her suit for annulment about three
months ago, claiming Leo had wife
living, from whom he had not been
divorced when the Nevada marriage
ceremony was performed 1t developed
on investigation that Leo's first wife
was granted a decree of divorce week
after his marriage to Mrs. Kirkpatrick
and the latter stated she was not
aware of this fact until last January.
Although Leo appeared in court yes
terday and gave testimony, he offered
no contest to his wifes suit, concedinS
that an annument should be ordered.
but contending the blame. if any, for
the illegal marriage should be placed
on the woman.
Makes Love to Stenographer
Mrs. Leo. in her testimony yesterday,
said she first became acquainted with
Leo in August, 1905, when she answered
his advertisement for a bookkeeper.
He employed her. and it was not long
afterward. she stated, that he began
making violent love to her.
Il knew he was married, but he al
ways gave me the impression his first
marriage was Illegal" she said. He
told me it was an enhancement with
a woman much older than himself
whom he had met in Russia"
The first advances, she declared, were
mad by the count"
rs it not true that, shortly after you
went to work in his office, he leaned
over your shoulder to give you some
instructions and you wrote on pad,
If you do that again I'll kiss you?' -
asked Leo's attorney. George II. Kelch.
Ms. Leo denied this. He made yio-
lent love to me and said he had per-
feet right to do So" she asserted.
In October, 1907 she soid the first
Mrs Leo, accompanied by detectives
invaded her apartment and created 4
scene when she found her husband
present. she told me I had no right
10 be with her husband. and I told her
if Leo was her husband he had no
right to be with me. Then I ordered
them to leave" declared the witness.
In March. 1905 Mrs Kirkpatrick went
t. Santa Barbara, where, she said, her
expenses were paid by Leo.
"A short time later" she continued
Leo came to my Santa Barbara home
and told me he was free to mary.
and showed me a letter purp0rting 10
be from Judge George r. Davis, then
a practicing attorney stating his mar
riage TO me would be legal. He rushed
me into it, saying he was afraid
would get away. He even refused to
let me telephone to my friends in Los
Angeles for advice"
Finds Marriage Is Illegal
She did not discover that her mar
riage was illegal, she said, until several
months later, when she consulted an
llpIlltN III Los [All1tl'S anu WAS dQ
vised to sue for annulment.
Count Leo denied his Wife's asser-
tions that she was unaware Of his in
ability TO marry at the time of thei~
mar age in April, 1908 There hid
been one hearing of his former wife's
divorce suit. he said, and he believed
an interlocutory decree had been en-
tered week prior to the Nevada mar
riage.
Il showed her the complaint for di-
vorce filed against me by my wife
March %, 1905 said Leo. "Shc re-
marked it was wonderful how I could
make things come my way and wanted
TO marry me as soon as the decree was
granted. At her request I wrote 70 Los
Angeles from Santa Barbara and re-
ceived a letter from the present judge
Davis stating that a marriage within
a year after the interlocutory decree
was signed would be invalid. I did not
try to prevent her from consulting he~
friends. but she became SO impatient
for the wedding that I finally yel1e
and we went to Nevada after the first
hearing OF my Wite's suit and were
married"
Judge Houser took the case under
adVisement.
80
nobLary