The Birmingham age-herald., 1924-01-27
DATE SET FOR
 CANDLER SUIT
(contirued from Pane one)

1 tConti6ueu rom Page Unel
 Switzerland in the interest of women, welfare throughout the world. Mir Candler accompanied her to the dock in New York and met the vessel there on which she returned. t Their acquaintance, the New Orleans societyy leader continued. ripened into friendship and an intimate corre- spondence ensued which correspondence resulted in frequent letters from defend ant to plaintiff
 The petition set out that after their engagement, Mir Candler informed her that certain members of his family had manifested decided opposition to his purpose to marry.
 Family Opposes
 "Defendant made it plain to plain 1ztiff that said opposition. was not based on his plan to marry plaintiff, but was basedsupoA experie1feed opposition of said members of his family to his purpose to marry at all." The peti- tion charged, Mrs. de Bouchel said, she then offered to break the en- gagement, but MT. Candler expressed his utter unwillingness" to release her and wanted the ceremony to take place ''as soon as plaintiff would con- sent to fix date. She asserted he told her of great sacrifices he had made for members of his family throughout his life" and mentioned the financial obligations under which he had placed them by voluntary gifts of large portion of his great fortune" :"
 MT. Candler told her, she said, that he would be able to convince the mem- bers of his family that his "only hope for lasting peace, comfort and happi- ness was based upon marriage. with your petitioner" Thereupon, she con tinued, she agreed to become his wife. ' Later, she declared, she found new cause to doubt the extent his influ- ence over his family and to genuinely suspect that q determined effort was being exerted by them to subordinate defendant to the influence of their own personal and selfish interests
 Marriage Date Fixed
 Finally, September 20, 1922, was the date fixed for the marriage at her resi- depfe in Reno, Nev., she said, and nN nouncement cards had been prepared | for mailing to friends. Mr. Candlrr told her, she asserted. that he desire,l to have Il general reception at his home in honor of the bride in order that his friends might welcome her upon her return from th-j.' wedding trip. She said he had submitted forms for t'fe reception which che approved and i re lrned and the wedding itenarary agl :td upon.
 Th clergyman had been engaged to perfd the ceremony, wedding bon quets ordered, ''an elaborate trousseau'' made. and some intimate friends in- formed of he wedding Cate," the peti- tion alle"pli. when she received letter iron Mi Canller dated September l5, 102s announcing change of his plans dnd purposes in the premises"
 Iii the letter. Mrs. te Bouchels pc ! tition said. defendant wrote your peti toner that it had just been reported tc him from sources he was bound to be 1 lieye. that there were two men in At lanta who declared that they had visited her at her room in a hotel in Atlanta at night. On her solicitation, and defend ant in s'il letter, declared that or such acct urt the engagement sh. uld be roAen off
 hGraHter Attacked
 l ':;rom HtdteneutS made by defendant {.ls.uin1iif G.s.TYeted an,! charges that de fen|ant t.:trc!'y meant that the alleged tv-., men referred to in said letter hat visited ilaintiff, at night. on her solic ! tatinn; ,t the hotel, in OctobeS~ 1919 during said Confederate reunion, ana ! fAr improper purposes, the petition cuntinred. Such charges are false, . ,l," declared
 Sfe said she demanded that Mr EaHdler furnish her with the names ol tie men "on whose alleged authority said charges had been made" but lie refused to dc s1.
 i Mr, CHmdlc:, in his answer to the petition, said he did become engaged ! to tn" plaintiff in January, 1929, and immediately thereafter, plaintiff sug- seSted tr defendant that they go at i cpce ind get married. which however defendant decl!nel to do nt that time. " i l:e admitted writing q letter to Mrs de Bouphel, adding the exact language of said letter k Ho;, however. quoted in said paragraph. he asserted h, made no charges against said petitioner, but merely stated to her ti.e .n.u. nlt,lon i he had received
 Cand-cr Shocked
 in another pin,e the answer of the Atlanta capitalist declared this de. 1 fenda1lt says that when the statement contained ill Said letter was first made known to, him he was ineXpressibly shocked and confused and did not know which course to pursue; and that at the time he wrote the letter. frank ly telhag he plaintiff of the statement made tcthini anl of his C, infusion and mental distress, that he did not cuIn, municate said statements to any one except plaintiff alone, nor would they Lave become publicly known throus