Norwich bulletin., 1922-07-07
DOESN'T KNOW WHY WIFE
 WANTED TO ,1sT FvF

N
 Dr. Harry M. Lee of New London was on the stand much of the day. Thursday in the superior court at New >London. giving testimony in the divorce suit brought against him by Mrs AdaIene Palmer Lee on the grounds of intolerable cruelty. He testified that Mrs. Lee had threatened at various times to ruin him professionally, socially and financially. and threatened to leave him and get square with him. although he said he did not know what she wos going to get square about.
 Dr. Lee gave testimony that Mrs Lees physical condition was much worse on his return from France after the World war than when he went away. He declared that aside from the noticeable lack of enthusiasm and affection toward him, he saw evidences that she had been smoking excessively she was thinner, paler than usual and that her condition was general ly had.
 He also declared that Mrs Lee had dis played anger and hatred toward him at various times and that it seemed to be more marked upon her return from visits away from home Dr. Lee said that Mrs. Lee had never charged him with anything and that although he had asked her for explanations of her attitude toward him 1 she had never given any.
 Dr. Lee said that although Mrs. Lee 1 had never showed him the love and af- 1 lection which he desired, yet she was still more hostile on her return from visits and he declared that the hostility ! was not due to any i'll treatment or cru city on his part
 sDr. Lee said that he had pleaded with Mrs. Lee with all his force many times i to try to cease smoking. He said that i he did not want Mrs. Lee to smoke at 1 all but he had never asked her to cease i the habit altogether but to at least stop Ito the extent that it would not injure her l healh
 l The witness also declared that he had J pleaded with Mrs. Lee against her using ! headache powders which he said she used to considerable extent and that he I had attempted ito explain to her the i'll I effects of smoking and using the head I ache powders. Dr. Lee testified that he had never actually seen Mrs. Lee take
 anything in the way of narcotics.
 He recollected testimony which Mrs 1 Lee gave at the hearing before Judge ] Brown for the custody of their child in which Mrs. Lee had said that on the Mon- day morning when she left Dr. Lees home she had come to the home of her moth CT in Broad street to get money for
 him that she had testified that she did T not know why she left that morning
 and that she had not made up her mind
 at that time to leave him.
 This completed Dr. Lees direct testi-
 mony and he was then cross examined
 by Attorney Steele of New Haven. Dr
 Lee denied thatfour or five months after
 his. marriage to Mrs. Lee in January i1912 he had an altercation with Mrs I.ee
 about Mrs. Palmer's will. He admitted
 that he had had a talk with her in which
 Mrs. Lee had asked him to speak to hel , mother about her will but he objected tc . the word altercation. Hes said that ir . refusing to grant Mrs. Lees request ht had made simple denial and that nc anger had been displayed by him. ri Dr. Lee also denied that he had any 1 discussions with Mrs. Lee about a similar Il subject in 1914 1915. 1919 and 1920. H,
 said that Mrs. Lee had talked with hin about the matter but he objected .tha he had no discussions. He denied tha f Mrs. Palmerss will had been the subjec . of contention between himself and Mrs ' Lee from the beginning
 Il His attention was called to testimon,
 of Mrs. Palmer, Mrs. Lees mother, a 1 the hearing on the custody of the child
 in which, she had told of conversation which he had had with her regardin,
 a bequest of $8000 for Baby Lee an, one ol 90U,UUV TOT AlfS Lee ana n
 branded everything which Mrs. Paime ]. . had testified to regarding money as qnso , lutely false"
 aj Dr. Lee denied that he had ever use
 profanity in the presence of witnesse who have given testimony in the case The doctors testimony was conclutle , during the afternoon and several othe. 1 witnesses were called before court ad : journed for the day. Among these wer : Mrs. Perkins and Mrs. J N Kelley.
 Trial of the case will be continue r this (Friday) morning at o'clock.