New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-01-19
FATHER BARES LIFE
TO SEE HIS SON
Parents Plea to Have Boy
Retain His Name Stops
Adoption.
MOTHER, A DIVORCE,
MARRIED AGAIN
Second Husband WithdraWs
Action SO Lad May Get Legacy
from Grandmother.

For love Of his son Maurice and out
Of regard for the boys future Asher
l.. Marks barred mis- past life yester-
day 20 Surrogate Cohalan I'm his
scrutiny Marks found no good reason
for believing that Maurice would be
better off i'm the care of his former
wife's husband. Arthur {. Rosenthsl.
though he was most scrupulous in
avoiding aspersions upon his charac
ter or upon that Of his former wife.
Mrs. Gertrude Teller Marks Rosen-
thai.
Roserthal, after reading the fathers
aiildavlts, appeared to share his views
and, with the permission of the Surro-
gate. withdrew his application for the
adoption OF Maurice. Maurice is five
years old and was present at the hear
inc yesterday with his mother.
From their marriage, in December.
1908. until September. 1910, he and
mis- wife were most affectionate and
congenal. Marks said. Then came a
separation. followed by a divorce, OBJ
tanned by Mrs. Marks
81 felt keenly the separation" said
Marks. "and being unable to see my
wife and my child, and feeling that
an injustice had been done me, ! did,
for a brief time. endeavor to find con-
ISOLATION in drink. When in that con-
dltion ! have probably done things
which ! later regretted.
mot wishing to annoy my wife" he
continued, 81 paid no attention to the
divorce suit"
After the decree was granted. Marks
spent two years travelling. He gave up
drink. But because OF his mistaken
chivalry in the divorce action. no pro-
vision was made for him to see his son.
Perhaps a dozen times he saw Maurice
at the home Of his own mother. Mrs.
Fannie l.. Glass.
81 did not request 10 see him often
err said Marks, "for | did not wish to
cause unplcasantness. ! contemplated
at one time instituting proceedings to
require my former wife 10 permit me
to see the child more frequently, but
thought IL best not to do this. because
! feared that the notoriety resulting
therelrom would reflect on my child
Mrs. Glass, Matrices grandmother,
Marks explained. intends 10 make the
boy a beneficiary TO a substantial eX-
tent in her will. providing he retains
his fathers name. The thought of the
boys future stifrened his resolution TO
20 into court and combat the claims Of
Rosenthal.
Despite the rarity of his visits with
his son, Marks never forgot the boys
birthday nor his Christmas. There
were always presents in Maurice's
stocking from his father.
81 have absolutely reformed Marks
asserted 81 have most excellent pros
poets. While lived with my former
wife and child | worked industriously,
my incentive being to make them hap
py. Since / realized that my wife Sc
cured a divorce | have labored earnest
~ for the sake of my child. If my child
is taken from me there will be no IN
centive to further eXertion.'
There was an affidavit by Mrs. Glass,
who owns 10 per cent of the Triton
Photograph Company, saying that she
is a woman of considerable wealth"
and showing her intention Of leaving
her grandson a considerable part of her
estate.
"If the child is taken out of my life, y
Mrs. Glass said. 81 certainly shall not
provide for him"
William +. Kinney, president of the
Rapid Transit Development Company,
and a dozen others subscribed to the
good character of Marks.