New-York tribune., 1911-03-01
SUES BROKER FOR DIVORCE |
Wife of Harley P. Wilson Seeks
AIimony of $4,000 a Month.
CHARGES FLATLY DENIED
Plaintiff Also Wants Separation
Agreement Set Aside on the
Ground of Fraud.

Harley T. Wilson. an investment broker.
at No. % Broad street. president OF the
Pacific Steel and Wire Company, vice-presi-
dent of the California Electric Generating
Company, director Of the Pacific Securities
Company and officer or director in num-
Der OF other corporations, Is the defendant
IN the Supreme Court i'm a SUIT brought by
his wife, Mrs. Frances Mary Wilson, for
divorce In another action the wife asks
that an agi cement Of separation now ex-
isting between them be set aside on the
ground Of fraud
According tO Mrs Wilson her husband
has fortune on 100000 or 100000 and
has an income Of 100000 year. In her
action for divorce she asked for allmony
OF $500 month and counsel fees of $3.50
FROM the papers i'm the suit, IL appears
that the principal cause Of the marital in
felicities Of the itigants is the alleged in
difference OF Mrs. Wilson to the welfare Of
their two children. especially their sixteen
year-old daughter. Alice A., who is now the
wife Of B. Gerson Oppenheim. jr., a law
clerk. Mr. Wilson says the marriage took
place In October, 1910. I'm Baltimore. with
the knowledge of the young woman's mother
and while he was not i'm New York. Mr.. and
Mrs. Wilson have not lived together for two
years.
Since November last the husband has
been paving his wife 1900 month, under
the agreement of separat ton which she now
seeks to set aside. In the divorce suit the
name Of Lena Dyke is mentioned. Mrs.
Wilson alleging that the woman and her
husband are living at the Central Park
Studios as Mr.. and Mrs. &. A. Davis. Mrs.
at no el
agreement was made in November 1910 and
the plaintiff alleged that she siened it on
account of threats of bodily violence made
by her husband. coercion and fraudulent
representations.
The wife said that the defendant forced
her into the agreement that he might carry
on his relations with the woman mentioned
by her and publicly humiliate his wife. The
fraudulent representation. she said consist
ed of Mr. Wilson declaring that she had
been guilty Of misconduct In permitting
her daughter to marry under the age OF
legal consent. which he told her was a
ground for separation, and threatening TO
abandon her and live in Europe and dis
inherit his wife and his children.
Mr.. Wilson said in his anger that he told
his wife that he objected TO his daughter
receiving the attentions Of young men, be-
cause he considered 1t cruel TO rob her OF
her childhood.
The separation two years ago. Mr.. Will
son said. came when his wife indifference
and indulgence with regard 10 their chill
dren became unbearablc. The other child
is Holt Chaddock Wilson. who is in school
at Deal Beach, y. J. At that time there
was a verbal agreement whereunder the
husband gave his wife 5000 I'm bonds. as
signed TO her the furniture in their apart
ment in the Hotel Woodward ana gave her
an automobile. lie reserved the right to
see the children whenever he wished. The
husband left part Of his clothing at the
hotel. that his children might not know
of the separation. They lived apart under
this arrangement until last November,
when the written agreement was made.
Justice Page decided yesterday that the
court could not grant Mrs. Wilson any
allowance until the agreement was abro-
gated.
In his opposition TO his wife's claim for
alimony Mr. Wilson denied that her in
come was only 80 month, as she alleged.
saying that she owned property in San
Francisco valued at $1,000. that she had
100 shares in the Western Pacific Company.
$500 worth of bonds in the Great Western
Power Company, of which the defendant
is the manager and a director. $4,000 in
iewelry and $4,000 in cash. showing. as he
set forth. that the plaintiff is not in needy
circumstances. AS for his own financial
condition, the defendant denied the csti-
mates placed by his wife on his fortune
and income but declined TO state the
figures as he said il was unnecessary.
He also denied the charges of his wife
on which the divorce action was based.
and which included further allegations
that the defendant had spent part of the
winter of 1910 i'm Paris. London and
Vienna with the correspondent.
Mr. Wilson went to some length regard
ing his wifes treatment of the children.
which. he declared. was the cause of the
trouble In the household. Ills wife. he
said insisted on living at hotels permitted
the children To neglect their sutdies and
encouraged them in aimless amusements.