Omaha daily bee., 1916-03-05

~ explosion is followed by a loud
report, a cloud Of sitting dust
and an unpleasant odor-phenomena
most strongly marked in the case OF
theatrical matrimonial explosions.
But, alas, again we find ourselves quot
ing the old-time clowns famous first
line, Here we are again" For in the
words of one Of their friends, James and
Clara Young have let their domestic
menage go to the demnition bow-wows."
Nobody is better known in the movies
than Clara Kimball Young. In the courts
she now asks to be released from her
marital partnership with her husband,
James Young. Her future promises bet
ter, looks brighter without him. The
question has been asked, "Is a husband =
detriment to an actress?"
And now that this matrimonial explo-
sion has filled the air with dust, 1t may
be long before It settles. IL Mr.. Young
presses his suit for damages against Mr..
Selznick, the well-known motion picture
producer. Thus the theatrical profession
Will receive another black eye, while to
the legal profession profit will accrue.
For as ''the young lions do seek their
meat Of God" so many lawyers seem to
seek their meat OF the theatres, and find
1t in goodly chunks, by way OF Injunction,
broken contracts, back royalties, dis
puted film rights, divorces, separations,
but never, never by breach of promise
suit
T. - 4.
her husband she complains that James
assailed her, grasping her and choking
her. thereby bruising her arms and neck
and causing her pain and anguish. On
one occasion, 80 she alleges, her husband
grasped her by the neck and hurled her
from him.
But this can hardly be the whole story.
In the millions of feet OF motion picture
reels of this charming actress she has
been in Just such situations, no doubt,
and worse For a motion picture actress
to be dragged around by her hair and
choked and bruised is all in the days
work. The hero or the villain or some
body does this sort of thing to the
heroine in almost every reel.
II is in the complaint Of James Young
IN his suit against Manager Selznick that
we discover an Illuminating sidelight. In
the husbands explanation of what has
been going on we find this paragraph in
his sworn complaint:
"Since March, 1914, the defendant (Mr.
Selznick), wrongly contriving and intend
ing to injure the plaintiff and deprive him
of the society and comfort OF his wife,
and willfully and maliciously intending
to destroy her affection FOR the plaintiff,
wrongfully and falsely represented to her
that the plaintiff was a detriment to her
artistic advancement and career and was
not ft to be her husband and compan-
ION"
Here we have the question raised in
this court proceeding as to whether this
particular husband was a detrlment to
this particular actress.
AS bearing directly upon this point Mr..
Young proceeds in his complaint as fol.
lows
"And the defendant promised that he
would promote Clara Kimball Youngs
advancement and career and promised to
enter into a contract with her for per-
sonal services in posing, and particu-
larly In making photo-plays, but on the
express condition that she must leave the
bed and board of this plaintiff.
Pursuant to a scheme, the defendant
did enter into a contract with her TO
appear under the defendants manage
ment and did instigate her to bring in
this court an action for a legal separa-
tiOn from this defendant"