The Monmouth inquirer., 1926-03-04
Verdict For
Woman's Love

Charging ''other woman" with
alternating the affections of her husband,
now dead, Mrs. Lavinia d. Robins
Of Mattison avenue, Asbury Park,
has been awarded yer dict Of $10,U0
against Mrs. Ella l.. Jenkins formerly o
resident of Asbury Park by a jury in
Judge Lawrence's common pleas
court. The present address Of the de-
PENDANT, who WAS represented by
James ID. Carton, is unknown. Charles
E. Cook was counsel for, Mrs. Robins
The suit revolved about the alleged
abandonment of Mrs. Robins in 1929
by her husband, G. Palmer Robins
now deceased, who was q partner in
the hardware firm of Snyder and
Robins, Asbury Park. Robins, it was
CHI arged, after selling his partnership
in the business for $25, 900 cash, eloped
with Mrs Jenkins. ~
Mr.. and Mrs. Robins were married
80 years ago. He was then a clerk
in the hardware store In which later
he became partner, In the summer
of 1915 he met Mrs jenkins, who was
a manicurist at Asbury Park. InNovem-
Der of the same year he left his home
and lived on Bangs avenue. 1t YVES al
legged that he and Mrs. Jenkins went
to New York and lived there as Mr..
and Mrs. Jenkins.
In the spring of the following year
they returned and for five years lived on
Fourth avenue In November 1928 he
he sold his partnership In the hardware
business. Mrs. jenkins sold piece Of
property she owned and the pair left, it
was alleged by Mrs. Robins.
Mrs. Robins at that time says she
spent $500 for detectives to conduct q
search for her missing husband. 1t was
learned that the money had been depos-
tied in New York bank and later with
drawn.
From that time until Mrs. Robins
learned Of her husbands death in July
1925,;at San Francisco, she did not know
his Whereabouts. Robins died in hospi-
tai following an operation. None of the
IN money which he received from the sale
of his partnership was found, it is alleg-
ed. Hisgfbpdy was shipped to Asbury
Park and the burial certificate was sign
ed by Mrs Jenkins, showing that she
had been with him at the time Of his
death. Mrs.dRobins, it was stated, had
to pay bothfhospital and physician's
bills, in addition to the cost of bring ing
her husbands body to Asbury Park and
the burial.
Evidence was brought out that Mr..
and Mrs. Robins prior to 1915, had
disagreements, but letters were read
to the jury, written by Robins to his
wife, begging forgiveness and beg
cling to be taken back. In 1917 after
he left, Mrs. Robins brought an ae-
tion to get alimony and was awarded
$40 week which he paid until Mo-
vember, 1928.
Another incident of the case was
brou4 hit out when MIR. Cook stated that
in 1920 Mrs. Jenkins had brought suit
against her husband, Frank, Of New
York, for divorce, charging desertion.
The husband fled a counter charge
and entered a denial Of his wife's
charges.
Trial was before Vice Chancellor
Foster of Newark. According to
Counselor Cook said Vice Chancellor
dismissed the action Of Mrs. Jenkins
and found her guilty of adultery, CIV
ing her husband a decree against her.
Robins, In the action brought by the
husband, was named correspondent.
Counselor Cook, making a plea for
a verdict declared that Mrs Robins,
struggled and saved with her hus-
band while he was clerk and
enabled him to purchase an interest
in the business. 1t wasl the lawyers
opinion that the wife was entitled to
portion Of the money her husband
received.
Counselor Carton, appearing for
Mrs. Jenkins, who did not defend
the action, stated that he had not
seen his client in five years, but
thought that inasmuch as he had
been retained previously by her he
was bound to enter a sdefense He
stated that Mrs Robins and her hus-
band had many disagreements, and
that Mrs. jenkins, therefore, did not
steal his love.