The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-07-18

The suit of the Chicago attorneys was
eejtlod for about the amount asked for
Just before the case was called for
tr.al IN the Federal court, but the tes-
tlmony on which Mrs. G~uggenheim
bases her suit Tor alimony is on file In
The Office OF the Clerk OF the United
States District Court and indicates that
assurances had been given to Mrs. Gug-
renheim and her attorney in behalf OF
Senator GuSgsnheim and his brothers
that they would he responsible for the
100000 needed to finance the settle
msnt II II could h. arranged. II Is
probable that the trial of the suit Just
fled will disclose int resting facts in
regard to diffcre. ces between the de-
ndants and their brother. william
watch led them 10 sign the settlement
arrsenent.
The testimony OF Stephen s. Gregory.
"no became chief couns ! in defending
The iuggenheim litigation early in 1918.
winch reveals the e~agerness OF the per-
q r involved in the Chicago proceed
i3ss u settl' with MIS-. Guggenheim.
shows tina; when he was in New York
IN october, 1918. about a month before
u" alleged agre ,ment was dated. he
~. asked by associate counsel In the
Csc to SO Samuel Cnternycr. who
IS charged by William GuSgcnheim
vfth arranging for the Chicago divorce
mi of receiving sG5. 600 for the work
h. did.
" Gregory said he told Mr.. Inter
rS-r he was satisfied the case ought
e. 'c settled" because while he thought
NJ G~uGGenheim would lose in the
courts There was "A possibility that this
case might be decided the other way
NJ Gregory said Il told him that
supposed this woman had squandered
- money she had been paid. $4,000,
a. was natural, and was probably reces-
si1us, ! said | didn't know whether
there Wa any warrant in law for hoil.
ic thar q man orce married 10 4
roman and divorced and havirS pail
her alimony was liable thereafter for
b support, bu , thought thu. proc
t.IN was the law or ought TO be the
law, on the same principle that a parent
is compelled to support a child of full
age or a child a parent in order to pre-
vent the necessitous one becoming a
pubic charge.
Greed Of a Gentleman.
7 added that whether that was the
hT % not ! thought 1t was part OF the
creed NJ a gentleman that II a man
vas ma rr!ed 10 a oma 1t didn't make
any difference who she was or what
&c was nor how man times they were
eForced, II she was In need and he had
The means 1t was his duty to support
heg and that I thought IL this woman
would come in and recognize the decree
" claiming under il and asked to have
q retdjustUent OF a%lir,ony 1t would be
q ludicious and humane thing to do to
MAKE a permanent promise for her sup
nort-not give her n lot OF money for
l'r % squander then. but provide for "A
certain stipulated income which she
tnould have. Mr.. Urtermyer told me
70 nave that case settled"
VIZ. Gregory said he then saw John
y steele, general counsel for NJ. Gug-
rheims Sons and concerning this
conversation he testified
made the same general statement
Mr.. Steele that 7 had just repeated
" NJ. Jntermyer. He wanted 10 know
the thing could be done lawfully AMI
u what marner. I said ] thought II
colld he done and that II she would ask
" have her alimory adjusted, why. that
N'uId AT !east establish beyond doubt
nc Integrity of the decree so that she
c'4ld never assail II and thus secure the
validity = the marriage of william
'I4eenheim and his present wife and
e~'abIish tho legitimacy OF his son, and
wax the consequences of 4 possible ad-
yrs" decision were so serious 10 con-
"Nl'd'e that this was n very important
q 'lIoIatIon.
H. StcCle rrpcited what Mr.. Inter
No. Htd SAID to me, that II was the
Pan ~ the four brothers otrer thar
r"n.'I and William TO make an adjust
" u { this matter"
~ ..tter dated October u, 1913. FROM
~ Steele to Mir. Gregory in Chicago
. 20 tho proposed settlement was Of.
y "1 100 cN.dc'cr and SAYS:
~ loIl Il. SiauChiield of the bar OF
u city VIII see YOU in Chicago next
v'r .N refereuc, TO this matter and he
w., '' fully authorized as far as those
q. 'LL. H.H-tL $1,000 at 40 ..AA 1A