Evening journal., 1915-08-25
WIFE Gone. sues
LIFELONG FRIEND
Frederick w. Hunter Begins
$4,000 Action Against
One Time Editor OF Life
FOR TWENTY YEARS
LIVED IN SAME HOUSE

NEW YORK. Aug. 25.-An action
to recover $4,000 from John Barrett
Kerfoot, writer and formerly literary
editor of Life. accusing him OF alien
ating the affections of Mrs. Annie
Belleville Haight Hunter, has been
started in the Supreme Court by his
brother-in-law, Frederick William
Hunter, a lawyer. The fling Of the
summons and complaint was the first
evidence the wide circle of friends
of the two men had of their breach
of friendship For twenty years Mr.
kerfoot and Mr Hunter had lived
together at Mr. Hunters homes in
this city and Freehold. n J.
Mr. Hunter. who is said TO be veal
thy and has not engaged continuous
ly in active law practice for many
years, charges that his brother-in-
law became attentive to Mrs. Hun
ter in September. 1914 Life in the
Hunter home at No. 127 East Thirty
seventh street, grew very unhappy.
according to the complaint. and on
April Is OF this year Mrs Hunter
left her husband Mr. Hunter says
Mr. Kerfoot is directly responsible
for Mrs. Hunters action.
The close friendship between the
two men began in their youth and
continued through their days as stu
dents in Columbia University. from
which both graduated in the class
of 1887 Mr Kerfoot had received his
early education in Europe. but on
ending his college course spent most
of his time in this country, often
making his home with Mr. Hunter
Married Mr.. Hunters Sister.
In 1895 he married a sister of MIR.
Hunter, Miss Sarah F. Hunter. who
died the following year. Following
her death Mr. Kerfoot made his home
permanently with his brother-in-law.
Each summer they went to the Hun
ter residence in Freehold. n. J.
Mr. Hunter married Miss Haisht on
June 25, 1899 She was the daughter
of the late Charles T. Haight, pros
ecutor Of Monmouth county, N. j..
for three terms. who lived in Free
hold Following their wedding Jour
ney Mr.. Kerfoot continued 70 live in
the Hunter home. and there we're no
disagreements among the three for
fifteen years
Mr. Hunter makes no explanation
, in his complaint Of the alleged change
! in the relations between his wife and
brother-in-laws He gives the specific
date OF September IS, 1914. as the
first day Of unhappiness in his fam
= ily From that time on Mr.. Kerfoot
acted in such a manner that he dis
rupted the home in less than a year
the complaint asserts.
Mr. Kerfoot accepted service of the
summons, and complaint at his pres
ent home, No 227 Riverside Drive
When seen last night he said the ac-
ltipn against him was begun 'in spite"
and that he would enter a general de-
nial Of all the charges Asked the
cause of Mr.. Hunters action, he said
Mrs. Hunter left his home. Mr. Hun
ter's action is in retaliation against
her. as well as myself"
Not TO Blame, He says.
Mr.. Kerfoot asserted that he had
no part in the change Of attitude OF
Mrs. Hunter toward her husband and
would establish the fact that the ac-
ton against hiIl was unwarranted q
have known Mr. Hunter for many
years" he said "and we were close
friends, but I have not seen him for
several months"
Mr.. Hunter has closed his home al
No. 127 East Thirty-seventh street
and is said to be living in Freehold
Carlisle Norwood, of No. 6S William
street, represents him in the present
action Mr.. Kerfoot will be repre-.
sented by the law firm of Engelharc
&Pollak. His biography, appearing
in Who's Who in America. mention:
his frequent contributions TO periodi
Gals and gives the residences of Mr.
Hunter as his addresses. He is {
member of the Phi Delta Theta Fra
lternity
Mr.. Hunter for many years hai
been a collector of antiques. Three
years ago he gave a collection o
Stiegel glass to the metropolitan