The Washington herald., 1909-06-26

New York. June 5.-Mrs. Howard Gould
won her suit for separation against her
multi-niuionaire husband to-day, and was
granted aiimony OF 500 per day. Justice
Dowling delivered his decision immedi-
ately the case was closed. He took no
time whatever for consideration after
the lawyers had finished. evidently hav-
ing had bis mind made Up.
Clarence J. Shearn. Mrs. GOuld's cou1-
SCI. received $500 as ais fee That was
the maximum amount which the law per
mit5ed the court 20 grant The plaintiff
had sued for alimony Of S25000o. but few
Os those who heard the case. except her
personal friends. thought that she would
get that amount
AL. the evidence was IN shortly after
noon. although had been expected tkas
the case would 20 on for the day with
the testimony OF minor witnesses. How
ever. when both lawyers said they had
finished. they expected the court would
take the case under advlsement for a day
or more However. Justice Dowling AZ
Orce began 70 give his decision.
Finds for the P1aintiG.
AS 1ar as The aIegations q continual
intoxication on the part Of the plaintiff
frvn Is22 10 1884," said the court. Il fnd
{ The allegations untenable. and the pre-
I iD0ndsrance OF evidence. gathered from
( the 10 witnesses heard in this case. IS
Overwhelmingly in favor or the plainJin-
AS Tar as the charges of inproper
4 conduct OF TIE plaintif with the witness
/ Farnum. there is nothing in this case
{ 10 prove that the pleinun committed any
,-,-- re the date OF the ieser-
ntin. There IS nothing
e -.-5w 4s IS was a Justification for
t his abandonment. IN fact. there is ao.h-
! ing. except 10 the charge Of intoxcation.
20 show the immediate cause for TIE de-
1 sertion by the defendant
There has been nothing n the case
70 bear out the charges OF impropriety
after the 6esertion. and while the evi-
/ dence IS in favor Of the PLAINTIFF. she
might better have been more discreet
and avoided contact with the witness
I FaruUm. even though she net him on
I business. Therefore. award 70 her
( judgment and costs.
Able 10 support Her.
IN the matter OF granting allowance
to the plaintiff. We found ourselves faced
with a diHhcut problem. In view of the
/ defendant-s large wealth and the testi-
mcny of the plaintiff. we have the fact
I that although they had lived vel. he
had never spent more than a third OF
his income He testified himself that he
had accumulated q private fortune
II is not the business OF the court 70
{ dispose OF the Defendants property, but
10 give 10 The plaintiff a sum that would
be adequately fair, having in view ths
means OF The defendant and the prior
/ mode OF living. The husband may BE ex-
( travagant or penurious. as he plsases- t1s
demand of the law Is satisfied = the vile
IS given enough 10 live properly
The difficulty Is IN determining What
a reasonable sum would BE- We have
( the testimony OF the plaintiff 10 prove
/ that before the separation he gave hes'
an allowance OF $1,000 month. and for
q while after he left her she got 500
I 8 monrh- This allowance was reduced 10
+ $500 q year and was confirmed b. the
court.
Gives Her Ample Means.
.-Of course. the cou-t cannot provide her
with her yacht or The surroundings that
she has been accustomed 10. but the court
cau and should provide her With ample
means. as the desertlon occurred on the
part OF the husband. Il should provide
her with more than is sufficient 10 keep
soul and body together. otherwise IL
would be Putti7g q premium on the de-
sertion OF wives b. their husbands
we have had testimony 70 prove that
the plaintiff has now IN her possession
/ iewelry worth more than S7oeo0- $50
( should be provided With enough means 20
enjoy every reasonable comfort and 20
+ maintain her station iu(life as the VIE
OF the defendant
This court has the power 10 do no
more than 10 provide these comforts and
I a maintenance o. her positions Therefore,
award her $3.50 a NORTH or SSSooo
4 year-somewhaS more than 500 day.
which I deem ample 20 provide these
necessities 70 her.
should the plaintfE decide 20 go on
the ssage or take Ep some other means
/ o. livelihood & viii, OF course, mean a
! change OF the terms. This allowance 70
be gTanted 20 her while she IS without
such means OF livelihood
Gets Thirty Days Stay
Immediately after the decision, DEAN
cey Nicom. counsel for NJ. Could asked
for a sixty-day stay OF judgment. and
( AR. Shearn was on his feet 10 object
4 Esc asked for an immediate judgment
Justice Dovlng compromised by making
the stay thirty days
E Mrs G0ula was in great gles when the
( unexpected decision OF the court came
Il sought v.ndication more than the
money" she said. 4 wanted complete
vindication, oud I have won f."
In concluding his denomination Of
( the plaintiff. Mr.. Nlcol said:
Mrs Could. I understood you 10 say