The Washington times., 1920-04-04

SVHERE is . very old belief that
II dreams go by contraries." Sus-
= picious wives and husbands listen
ing In the night to words murmursd by
sleeping mates have never been quite surej
OF this. And some scientists. headed by
the distinguished DIR. sigmund Freud.
have comparatively recently thrown much
doubt upon the matter. asserting that our
dreams actually reveal our most secret.
hidden desires.
. Now, by a decision Of Judge J! +. Rush.
Off Chicago. the older idea has received
judicial approval. The ruling is calculated
10 give great aid and comfort to husbands
who have the habit Of talking In their
Asleep and to reassure jealous wives as to
their loyalty. But. on the other hand. 1t
must give much discomfort to those whose
ramblings in slumber have seemed per.
Sectly innocent and innocuous to the
eavesdropperi The burden has not been
shifted from the talk. but only from one
to the other OF two kinds Of takers. ,-
.If he talks in his sleep-it isn't true"
This. in effect. is the nugget in Judge
,Rush's decision. brought forth by the com.
lplaint of wife whose husband did talk
In his sleep and upon whose slumber
words, largely. she brought suit for
Iseparation before the Chicago courts.
This being SO. It follows that startled
wife who hears husband. while in deep
siumber,> murmuring such endearing terms
as "sweetie," "dearie" and other sugary
Expressions of love, all addressed to some
ono clearly not herself can turn right over
md 10 OF to sleep again. blissfully certain
that the dreamer's heart is hers and hers
alone, But. conversely. II she should hear
him In sleep deliver himself OF lofty. high.
minded sentiments. fragmentary dis
courses upon the duty Of husband. re-
Dukes to vampires and sirens and so on
than that gentleman would seem to need
careful watching.
Or in the exact words OF Judge Rush IN
Delivering his ruling:
"It is the courts opinion that what
person may say while dreaming or sleep
ing may be absolutely the opposite OF what
that person may say or think In actual
consciousness. Therefore, testimony con-
cerning what a person may say while
reaming is not proper evidence ana snail
be ordered stricken from the court record
The case which brought forth the de-
cision was that OF Mrs: Anna vailas/
against her husband, William H.. Vallas,
Sr a wealthy manufacturer OF Chicago.
Mrs. Vallas demanded separation and
maintenance. The two had been married
IN England more than a quarter OF CEN
tury ago. The greater part OF her mar
ried life. she told the court, had been
happy.
The vallases had two sons-Wiliiam
and Lionel All four seem to have had
interest in the conduct Of the Vallas busi'
ness.
Mr.. vallas had also a comely young
stenogra pher, a Mrs. Knecht, OF whom, as
the novelists say, more later.
Lionel, the mother testified. speedily
turned into the business dictator OF the
family. William and she found them.
selves in matters Of policy uniformly lined
up against Lionel and Mr.! Vallas. Quar-
rels arose, Mrs. Vallas and William object
ing to the form OF partnership agree
ment drawn up by Lionel which, they
thought, was unfair to them.
And right here, Mrs. Vallas testihed,
before even she had heard her husband
say a suspicious word In his sleep, she
began to have her doubts. For, she also
testified, the comely young stenographer
lined herself up on the side Of Lionel and
Mr.. Vallas; and, what Is more, she found
out the stenographer had drawn up the
offending agreement.
Looking closer, she soon had reason to
believe, she said, that constant association
had caused her husband to succumb to the
charms Of Mrs Knecht AS evidence OF
the extent OF his infatuation she intro
duced testimony to show that Mr. Vallas
had once taken the young woman to
church sociable!
Mrs. Vallas demanded that her husband
discharge Mrs. Knecht, but he refused.
contending that she was efficient and her
reputation unassailable.
Suspicion grew; then fell the blow
MY husband talked in his sleep" said
Mrs. Vallas. HE would mutter the name
OF sis and 'Sissie.'"
He muttered It, she thought, endear.
ingly, coupling 1t with affectionate adjec.
tives.
Mrs. vallas had never been called isis"
or "Sissie" in her life. Who was the
dream woman OF her husbands slumber-
pus wanderings who was so called?
Hs!
She discovered
Ha, again!
isis" and "Sissie" we're pet names OF
Mrs. Knecht the comey young stenog.
rapherl
II was this part OF the wifes evidence
that judge Rush ordered stricken from the
record. later denying Mrs. Vallas the