New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1912-10-09
C0NKL|NG BESET BY LAW
Much Ado Over His Affairs in
Many Courts Yesterday.
ANSWERS SEPARATION SUIT
Referee Reports on Daughters
Allowances and an Agent
Pleads Guilty.

The domestic and financial affairs OF
Alfred r. Conkling, lawyer, reform poll
tician, author and nephew Of Senator
Roscoe Conkling, figured prominently in
the courts yesterday.
In the first place, Mr. Conkling filed his
answer to the suit for separation which
his wife, Mrs. Ethel Johnson ConkIing,
has brought against him, denying her al
legations of cruelty and saying that Mrs.
Conkling has abandoned him, arguing
that for that reason he should have a
separation and the custody of their three
daughters.
In the Surrogate's Court Wilbur Larre-
more, az referee, filed his report on the
request OF Mr.. Conkling, as general
guardian for his daughters, for an In
crease in the allowance made for the
maintenance Of the girls from the estate
OF George Lorillard Ronalds, their uncle,
who left them the bulk of his estate,
which is In trust during the minority OF
the Conkling children. Mr.. Conkling
wanted to use the entire $4,000 year In
come for the support Of his daughters.
The referee recommended that an in
crease OF 500 be made for each girl,
making the total to be allowed to the
general guardian $1l,50o
Then, in the Criminal Branch Of the
Supreme Court, John r. Kellogg, real
estate broker, who was many years the
fiduciary agent for Miss Laura r. Conk-
ling, sister Of Alfred r. Conkllng. pleaded
guilty Of approprfahng to his own use
money belonging to the executors OF the
estate, who are Alfred r. Conkling and
his brother. Howard Conkling.
Also, yesterday the executors OF the
estate Of Miss Conkling filed a suit
against Kellogg. who pleaded guilty to
the theft Of a check for $685. alleging
that he ,rnisappropriated 1851, for which
amount suit Is brought.
Mr.. Conkllng said in his answer in the
separation suit that, for one thing, he is
not worth 1000, as his-wife said, but
only 10000 He denied that he had for
a long time. sought causes for quarrels
with Mrs. Conkling, or had insisted on
managing the household. or, as his wife
alleged, instructed the servants to take
only his orders. Nor did he, said Mr..
Conkling, try to humiliate his wife before
their children by referring to her as a
drunkard.
The defendant denied that he had caused
constant quarrels covering a period OF
four years or that he refused to talk 10
Mrs. Conkling for six weeks at a time.
Mrs. Conkling said that she had asked
her husband 10 stop sending her certain
notes, OF which she said he sent her
four and five q day. This request also
applied 10 pictures which the wife said her
husband sent her. She feared that one
OF these might fall into the hands OF
her children or servants. Mr.. Conkling
denied that he had chided and leased his
wife by means OF the letters and drawings
referred 10 by Mrs. Conkling.
As to the proceedings in the Surrogate's
court for the increased allowance for the
Conkllng children, Mr.. Conkling had tes-
tilted at a prior hearing that his income
was $1,000 a year. but he later explained
that Il amounted TO only 81, 800 He said
that his income was insufficient TO sup
port his daughters in the style to which
they were used and their social position
required. One of the special guardians
appointed by the Surrogate to look after
the affairs OF one of the girls said that
Mr.. Conkling was using the income OF
the daughters from the Ronalds estate to
pay the running expenses OF the house
hold.
Kellogg, who pleaded guilty to larceny
OF funds belonging to the estate OF Miss
Laura r. Conkling, IS sixty-one years old.
Much difficulty was had In finding him to
effect his arrest He was arrested while
he was telephoning Mr.. Conkling for
money. He will be sentenced tomorrow
by Justice Blanchard.
The complaint in the civil suit flied yes
terday against Kellogg said that he had
collected 1874 between January I, 1907,
and July !, 1911, and retained the money.