Evening journal., 1916-04-26
REMOVAL Of SIGN
Decreased EARNINGS
This Statement Made by
DIR. Davis, Charged With
Non-Support in Court
LOST $500 IN WAR
STOCKS, SAYS WIFE

when questioned In City Court To-
day as TO hts earning capacity, Dr..
Max Davis, a dentist, with Offices at
No. COS Market street who is charg-
ed with non-support, stated that his
Income had been considerably dimin-
ished since the Street and Sewer De-
partment compelled him to remove
his sign under penalty of arrest.
Davis said that up TO the time of
his sign being removed from Mar
ket street. he averaged S35 week.
His weekly average has been less. he
stated. since the sign was removed.
Dr. Davis was arraigned on
charge OF non-support Of his wife
and two children. Charles. aged
years. and Aliene. aged IL months.
The couple have been living at No.
2206 Monroe street. Mrs. Davis said
that her husband left her on Satur-
day. April 10.
Has your husband been earning big
money! asked Assistant city Solici-
tor Lynn.
He never told me what he earned
but he said he lost $500 in one week
In war stocks said Mrs. Davis.
Mrs. Davis said tnat her husband
left her before and at that time took
$4,000 with him, part of which belong
ed to her. She said she understood
he intended to leave town again.
Mrs. Davis admitted her husband
through his attorney, Aaron Finger,
offered to pay her Sl5 a week. She de-
clined IL because she considered IL
was not sufficient and also for the
reason that she had no assurance he
would continue TO make the pay
ments.
Mrs. Davis stated her husband had
spent all her money. She said her
father endorsed DR.. Davis note for
$1,000 when he purchased their home
at No. 2206 Monroe street. She said
there were two mortgages on the
place The property. she said. was to
have been bought in both her name
and that Of her husband. but that DIR.
Davis has it in his name alone.
Mrs. Davis stated that yesterday,
while their son, Charles, was in
o. School No, 80, DR.. Davis went there
and took the child and she has not
seen her son since.
DIT. Davis said the reason he left
his wife was because she had COM
mitted a brutal assault on him and
had scratched his face and struck him.
He said he has paid his wife SIS a
week since leaving her. He also said
he would not be able to pay the note
on his property when il becomes due
He said the reason he took the boy
away from the mother was because
she was too brutal and would almost
kill the child when he took candy
from her pocketbook. He claimed that
he had acted I'm the interest OF the
child. He was also afraid the mother
would poison the child's mind agains
him.
Dr. Davis said the child was with hi
parents in Philadelphia.
The taking of the child to philsdcl
phia 'ai~es grave question" " said As
sistagt City Solicitor Lynn
"Yes. it took the child out of TN
jurisdiction Of the court said Doput,
Judge Jo,lyu.
"Tho child is being held subject q
the court" said Aaron Finger, counsc
for Davis
"llahcas corpus proceedings could %
instituted TO compel the return of th
child said Deputy Judge Joslyn.
81 will say for Mr. Davis that he
willing To return the boy TO the mothc
on condition that she will do nothn
TO influence his mind against tn
father said Mr.. Finger.
"If the mother does such thing W,
will take the child from her again,
said Deputy Judge Joslyn.
Dr. Davis then formally promised tC
hand over the boy to the mother, bu
wanted to know If he would be per
mitted to see It at certain intervals.
Mrs. Davis said that Or. Davis al
ways did think more Of his sor
than of the daughter. II was agreed
that Dr. Davis be allowed to see tn,
boy at times.
Deputy Judge Joslyn then made a,
order directing that DR. Davis pay his
wife SIS a week and held him in S50l
security to pay this amount.