The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1923-08-02

+, to me he didn't believe in churches
or in any other kind of marriage"
! The situation that develops when
an individual sets his Law above the
law of the clan, the state and the
nation, resulted for Paul, though it
did not develop Until he had become
the father Of two boys whom he dearly
loved and after he had lived with Katy
as man and wife for ten years.
Then Paul found out that Katy, his
| humble little pupil, had learned his
Lesson too we'll; he wanted to marry
her, to protect his rights as the head
OF the little family, and Katy refused
Turns for Help to the Police.
In his despair, finding that as
lover-father he had no rights under
the law, Ratobielsl6i turned to the very
law he had scorned and invoked the
help of it's ministrants, the police.
He declared that another man was
wooing Katy, and he, Paul. wouldn't
stand for it. He wanted the comfort
and happiness of his home, his wife
and his children undsturbed by the
shadow of rival.
But when Paul besought Katy to
marry him and make an honest man
of him, he found again that his pupil
had graduated under his own instruc-
tions, was reluctant to marry him and
even refused. Katy persisted in her
refusal, even when approached by the
police. But eventually in the midst of
the tangle license was issued in the
office of the county clerk and the pair
were pronounced man and wife in the
office of County Judge r. V. Baker.
Everyone thought that the ceremony
was in the protection of the children,
to give them a name and also to give
the sanction of the law to the mar
riage relation between Paul and Katy.
A Curious TangIe.
Then as was disclosed this morn
ling, Paul and Katy blessed by the
consent Of the community, did not go
home together. Paul was willing and
anxious to reign as the head of his
house, but his little bolsheviki mistake
in Buenos Ayres ten years ago could
not be undid. Katy spurned him. She
did not love him any more. His drag
cling her to the police Office and charg
es against her filled her with horror.
Attorney L. E. Vaudreuil, now seeks a
divorce from a union which is intoler
able to her and which she claims she
was forced into. Attorney r. V. Bak
err, the judge who married the pair,
is counsel for the husband, Ratobiel-
ski, and he sought to have the mar
riage confirmed.
Attorney Baker informed the court
that as county judge he had granted
statutory marriage, that is, without
waiting for the usual five days to
elapse. He said that he had stretched
a point in granting this, believing it
in the interests of the family as dii
the other officials concerned with the
case. He suggested, however, that
perhaps in view of Katy's contention
that she had been forced" into the
marriage, the ceremony would mot be
binding, particularly since the couple
had not cohabited together since the
marriage ceremony.
The situation presented curious
tangle and several questions: Were
Paul and Katy married under common
law when they entered their verbal
contract in Buenos Ayres at the time
when Paul said his "word was right?
VaudreuiPs complaint described the
union as common law marriage, but
Attorney Baker maintained that it was
not for the reason that Spanish law
was the basis of the law of Argentine
Republic and Spanish law did not
recognize the common law marriage.
If Katy and Paul were not a COM
mon law married couple, were they
man and wife by the CEREMONY in Ke-
nosha on May 8, 1923, since Katy's
consent, as she now claims, was wrung
from her under coercion, and since
the couple did not cohabit together
after the marriage?
If they are now of the status Of
husband and wife, has Katy any
grounds for divorce?
Paul opposes the divorce. He still
wants Katy and wants his children
and his home. He is anxious to have
the state, which he once scorned, pro-
tect him.