The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-06-15
STARTLING EXTRAVAGANCE Mrs. Gould's Wardrobe
 Very Costly. A GOWN FOR EVERY OCCASION Divorce Proceedings Attracting Considerable Interest.
 --e- Crowds at Court Room Yesterday Were 2 2. Sc Great That Special Police Measures Were Necessary
 fo Preserve order. 
A GOWN FOR EVERY OCCASION

New York, June 14.--Abandonment win be the sole issue upon which the suit for separation brought by Kath- Eerine Clemmons Gould against her hus- 'band, Howard Gould. third son of the late Jay Gould, will be decided.
 This ruling was made late today in the Supreme Court by Justice Bowling after counsel for Mrs. Gould had rest ed the case for the plaintiff. This sweeps away several phases of the case r-rnotably cruelty and non-support. and is partial victory for Howard Gould. As to the charge of abandonment, the court held that this. too. might not stand unless the plaintiff was able to show that Howard Gould's stipulations for reconciliation with his wife were unreasonable. This phase of the case will be argued tomorrow.
 Developments in the case today were the most interesting in the trial. George Gould a brother of the defend- ant. testified, and Mrs Gould was ex- cused from the stand after three days of searching cross examination. After the case for the plaintiff was rested, Delaney Nico1l, for the husband. made the usual motion to dismiss the suit on the ground that the plaintiff had failed to make out a case.
 There have been no evidences of cruelty" he argued. "one of the aile- gations Is that the piaintin was sur rounded by spies. Nothing has been adduced to prove 1t. Then, there Is the Hawley incident. Nothing in that bears out the charge of cruelty"
 Referring to the abandonment / charge. he said Howard Gould left his wife in July, 1906. but offered to gfe- turn on perfectly reasonable terms, among other things her abstention from intoxicating liquors Mrs. Gould, he continued refused.
 During the foregoing argument, Mrs. Gould became faint, left the court room and did not return. Then her counsel iClarence Shearn, began argument Iagainst the motion for the defense to dismiss.
 Tt Is cruelty he affirmed. for a husband, without Justification, to ac- euse his wife of being a had character for to entettain against heE, without 'nause. refiections against her honor.
 What kind of a conspiracy was Mfr. Rgicoll engaged in" he asked, when he got habftues of a saloon to work in the purpose of proving Mrs. Gould q woman of bad repute? That was the tempt to have his wife pledge herself not to drink, in Nitself constitutes cruelty"
 It was this clause in the agreement the husband had asked the wife to sign before he would consent to live with ner again JhaI AEss GOulu most strongly objected to.
 "What," she had exclaimed earlier in the day, during cross examination, ''have me sign myself drunkard9 Neverr'
 Inasmuch as the abandonment charge only is to be considered tomorrow, there will be no further mention of Buffalo Bill, Big" Hawley, the former convict, or Ed Sholes. the reputed gambler. But 1t still leaves open the question of Mrs Goulds indulgence in intoxicants.
 Whatever bearing the events of the day will have on the ultimate decision in the case, honors were about even in the verbal battle between the cross examiner and Mrs. Gould. Both sprang surprises. The lawyers most perti- inent and apparently embarrassing ,thrust was the exhibition of faded fptd-fashioned photograph of a young woman: that of a white horse, with the swhite canvas of circus tent in the background. Mrs. Gould turned dull fred as it was shown, but she would fnot identify the photograph as one of lherself, nor would she swear that 1t twas not She thought it was hardly E6at enough for me"
 The picture was introduced to show If possible, Mrs. Gould's former asso- citation with Buffalo Bilrs show. She
  Ethat she was in any way connected kwith this Wild West show though ad- Emitting that she had travelled at times lwith Colonel W. F. Cody and his Idaugfiter. and that he had been her manager.
 A Cutting RetOrt.
 In retaliation for the picture inci- Ident, Mrs. Gould made one cutting re- tort to her inauisitor.
 MT. NicolI had been asking the wit ness about her gowns, how many she fwore, how often she wore them and what became of them. They were given away. Mrs. Gould testified.
 "one of them." she shot In. ''was given to your own sister, who is on the stage, l have aided many poor girls to get stage engagements by equipping them with my discarded gowns"
 "Did 1t become her?'' was Mfr. NicolPs only rejoinder.
 As was the case Friday, a good part of today was taken up in questioning Mrs. Gould concerning her lavish ex- penditures. How many gowns to wear a day, how long 1t took to dress and the declaration that 1t was "very bad taste" to wear a gown twice, were among the interesting fashion hints in the testimony. The name of Dustin Farnum, the actor, was again brought in and George Gould told of how he had instituted an investigation to as- certain the facts concerning an alleged marriage of the plaintiff before she be- came his brothers wife.
 So lareg crowd gathered at the County Court House to- day to attend the trial of the suit for separation of Katherine Clemmons Gould against Howard Gould, that special police measures were necessary to preserve order. The great major ity were disappointed as Justice DowI- ing limited admission to the seating capacity of the court room
 Preliminary to the reopening of the trial, counsel for Mrs. Gould applied to Supreme Court Justice Giegrich for additional fee of S20.00o and SS,s34 to cover the expenses Of the case to date. Argument on the application was set for D. m. tomorrow. Mrs. Gould showed a few evidences of nervous tension under the rapid fire of cross examination which Delaney Nicoll. att torney for Mir. Gould began to direct at her when she resumed the stand at the opening of court. Questioned in regard to her acquaintance and meet ings with Dustin Farrum. the actor, the witness testihed that She did not