Omaha Daily Bee Newspaper, December 26, 1915, Page 21

g N E Mrs. James Murray Mitchell, Whose “Stop Loss” Suit for Her Husband’s Love Ended in a $700 Verdict, ‘Worth Only $#700. . The Curious Considerations of “Stop Loss’’ Orders on Affec- tions, “Margins on a Wife’s Bank of Love’’ and a “Heart as a Stock Asset’’ That Prompted a Jury to Make One of the Lowest Valuations on Record Upon a Lost Husband JURY has awarded Mrs. James Murray Mitchell, wife of a Wall street broker, $700 as its estl- mate of the worth of her husband’s love. Mrs. Mitchell had sued Mrs. Ruth Aus- tin, a younger woman, for $25,000— which was her estimate of what she thought his affection was worth. What she recelved s the lowest valuation of e« man’s heart ever recorded in New York County with one notable exception, when only six cents were awarded to a women who commenced a similar ac- tion some years ago. The Mitchell decision ralses a number of unusually interesting questions. For instance, with Stock Exchange seats sell- ing now for around $70,000, what was it that determined the jury to declare a broker’s heart worth only and just one per cent the value of the seat? The manner in which this and other questions were decided was, if information that comes directly from those most intimately connected with the verdict and its evolu- tion are to be believed, as interesting as the questions themselves. For it hap- pened that the jurymen were, almost without exception, men thoroughly fa- miliar with stock exchange ways and methods, and they at last argued the points purely from a stock exchange viewpoint. o In other words, they put themselves in the position of brokers. Mrs. Mitchell was their customer and Mr. Mitchell's love the stock whose value they had to determine. Take, for instance, the question men- tioned. It is true that a Stock Ex- change seat is a staple institution, always there and, witile subject to fluc- tuations, in time of panic, still never inconsiderable in its quoted price. But on the other hand, a man's heart is al- ways there while he's alive; it has its fluctuations, of course, but its value to its owner at least is never inconsider- e. .mAh. sald the wise jury, that is true of the stability of the seat and true also of the stability of the heart. But the value of each s in reality determined by the quality and quantity of what they deal with., The Stock Exchange deals with stocks, bonds and so on; the heart with affection, love and so on. If the supply of good stocks decreases, and bad stocks take their place, the value of the Stock Exchange seat decreases. If the quality and quantity of emotions that occupy what we call the heart deteriorate then equelly the value of the heart de- teriorates. A Heart’s Fluctuations in a Love Bear Raid. Another question—Is a broker's heart subject to bear raids and bull raids? Ought a wife put in a stop loss order when she suspects that her husband's love is on the wane? Can he call upon her for margins from her bank account of affections? But before going into these and other unique considerations that swayed the Mitchell jury and the final extraordinary scene in which the heart of James Mur- ray Mitchell was bid down to $700 in true Stock Exchange fashion, it will be nec- essary to know what led up to and was the cause for calling in any jury at all. Mrs. Ruth Austin,. twenty‘four years old, and profoundly indignant, sat en- grily in the witness chair. “Look at her, gentlemen,” sald the fawyer for the plaintiff. “Do you not think her alluring? Look upon those soft brown eyes, at that exquisite figure, melting curve into curve, at that pouting mouth. Behold that creamy skin, the lovely ring-welghted hands. Could she not allure any man? She could.” A titter from the court room. A ri- bald volce husked, “Thou, too, Brutus.” There were more titters, Mitchell's stock stood at $25,000. Had the jury retired at that moment, Mrs. Mitchell would have been richer, and her rival poorer by $25,000, But at Mrs Austin's determined answers Mitchell's stock began to tumble, The examination ran like this: “How long have you known Mr. Mit chell? “About four years.” “How did you meet him?" “I was introduced by some mutval friends.” *“Did you ever addrese Mr. Mitchell and say to him that he must abandon his wife and come to you?' “No.” him?” *“No.” “Did you ever entertain any love or affection for him?” *“No.” “Did you ever speak to Mrs. Mitchell by tele- phone?” “Never.” “Did she once ask you by telephone what you wanted to speak to her husband about, and did you reply with profane language, it was none of her business?” “I never did.” “Did you ever see him at the Waldort- Astoria?” “Yes.” “Was he with his wife?” “Yes.” “Did you speak to her?” “No.” “Did you speak to him?” “Only bowed to him.” “After he separated from his wife, didn't he discuss the mat- ter with you?” “No.” “Don’t you think it would have been natural?” “I never thought of it and he never volunteered.” “Did you ever meet any of Mrs. Mitchell's family?” “Yes. Her brother. I went to a dance with Mr. Mitchell and him and danced with both of them.” At this time, had the jury retired, it would have brought in a verdict of no damages, for it belleved Mrs. Austin. But then there was the testimony of Mrs. Mitchell. She repeated what ap- peared in her complaint, repeated it with tears. “Tell your story in your own way, Mre. Mitchell,” said her counsel. “] went to the Waldorf-Astoria with my husband. It was one night about two years ago. He had behaved very well and was very attentive until he saw Mrs. Austin. While I was dancing she bowed and smiled at my husband. She came over to him and her arm around the back of the c. in which he was sitting. After that. he wanted to send me home alone, but I wouldn't go by myself. “He consented, sulkily, to take me home. But after we got homo he left and did not return until five in the morning ” Influence of Mrs. Austin Upon Mitchell Heart Stock. The lawyer, reading from the com- plaint: “You stated, did you mnot, ‘that after he met Mrs. Ruth Austin he became a different man. He became estranged. His regard and affection for you were destroyed? You sald, did you not, ‘that in or about the month of May, 1918, she in- duced and wilfully and maliciously en- ticed the sald James Murray Mitchell to desert you and your children, leaving you without means of support, and that she induced him to go to her place of abode in the City of New York and elsewhere, at which place and places she has since harbored and detained the said James Murray Mitchell against your will? Did you so swear?” “1 did.” “Mrs. Mitchell, did you write this letter?" Mrs. Mitchell examined the letter and nodded, “Yes, sir,” she sald. “] wrote that after I had summoned him to the Domestic Relations Court to l:ulo him support the children and myself. The attorney read the letter— “If instead of busying yourself running in and out of a cafe downtown and con- suming all the liquor possible every afternoon you would save g little money you might not be in court so often. While you are drinking your silly head off Aus- tin is flirting with your rivals.” The jury looked reproachfully at Mrs. Austin. How could she have deceived them so with those big, brown, appealing eyes? Mrs. Austin cast down those eyes and looked distinctl lky. “A verdict against her for the Iimit Twenty-five thousand if a cent,” each “Are you in love with Juror in his heart. Then appeared Mr. Mitchell. The Jurors surveyed him with interest. The man about whom two women go to law is always of interest to other men who have led a commonplace existence. He was thirtyone years old. He was very tall. He was reasonably handsome, but the jury could find flaws in his beauty. Each believed that among their number wn; one, at least, who was as handsome as he. “My reason for leaving my wife was not in any way related to Mrs. Austin,” he insisted. “My wife is very fond of society. She liked to go about and to dance. She used to insist upon my ao- Miss Daisy Markham, English Actress, Whose Verdict of $250,000 for the Loss of the Marquis of Northampton's Love Is the Highest Valuation Ever Made of Any Man’s Heart. companying her to dances and stay until half past three in the morning. I had to get the returns from the London stock market at five. So I never had enough sleep and I was breaking down. My nervous system did break down. T told tmy wife that I could not stand her kind of life and that we would better live apart, “I have suffered reverses since the war, but I am now supporting my wite and children. The defendant has never persuaded nor enticed me, by offers of money or in any other way, to leave my wife.” Burdened with this conflicting test!- mony the jury retired to consider the three points of a strange triangle of testi- mony, “What are his affections worth?" asked an impatient juror. .That’s all it simmers down to. What do you think?" “1 say $25,000,” affirmed one. “Twenty-five thousand? You're crazy. The affections of a man who is dissatis- fled with nis home and his wife are worth six cents,” said another. Appalled at the difference between these extreme estimates, others tried to effect & compromise. A scattering bal- lot was taken. It resulted in these esti- mates of the worth of Mr. Mitchell's af- fections: $26.000; $10,000; $15,000; $160; $75; $.06. ‘The battle raged. The $25,000 man and the six cent man openly hated each other The $10,000 man begged for & com promise, “Well, gentlemen,” sald one, “now that we have agreed that the plaintiff is en titled to a verdict, it ought to be easy to decide how much. But everyone seems to think differently. One juror—“It seems to me that we ought to apply the principles which gov rn stock transactions. We're the brok s, ‘he wife's our customer, her hus- band's affec tions are the stocks.” Another Jur- or — “Well, in that case, the stock whose value we have to appraise fis the husband's affections for the plaintiff, Before the de. fendant came into thelr lives that stock was worth consid- erable no doubt. Before the defendant started what we might call a bear raid, (chorus from several tired Jurymen “She's a bear! She's a bear!"). This 8tock was worth considerably more than it 1s to-day. This plaintiff can't expect to get as much now for her stock as she would have got if she had had to put it on the market before the panie.” Another juror—*But perbaps this is only a temporary slump, How do we know that if this defendant hadn’t come into the case, Mrs. Mitchell's stock would not have appreciated in value? We ought to take that into consideration. We are putting a value on it and we ought to take into consideration the fact that the wife might have regained some of the loss she has sustained by reason of this bear raid.” Another juror—“No, not at all, all we are concerned in is the value of the stock to-day. Bethlehem Steel may be worth $400 a share to-day and if we have to sell it to-day all we can get for it is $400 despite the fact that yesterday it may have been worth $600 and to-morrow it may be worth $1,000.” Another juror—"That's all right, but if the wife puts up some more margin she can hold onto her stock until the market improves and then she can get a better price. She claims she had a Targe bal ance in the bank of love. Why didn't she put up the margins? Another juror—There s no evidence to show her husband asked for more margins. If she offered them and he Copyright. 1915. bv the Star Company. Great Britain Rights » TaE OMAHA SUNDAY BEE MAGAZINE PAGE, aWall S’treet Brokenrss Love is Ceatn, < IV A T gy Mrs. Ruth Austin, Whose “Bear Raid” on e ——— r. Mitchell's Heart Caused the Suit. refused them it wasn't her fault, Another juror—"No, no, it's too late to talk about more margins now. This plain- tiff saw the value of her stack going down and in order to save something out of the wreck she put in a stop-loss order which we are called upon now to execute. We are the brokers. The limit having been reached we've got to execute the order and all we can obtain for our cus tomer is the market price prevailing to gl"(;ool"'l my opinion this stock isn't worth Another juror—"Don't forget this stock once pald a dividend. Don't you think we ought to give her something for the possibility .that the dividends might have been resumed If this defendant hadn’t butted in?" “Well, all I'd vote for {s $600." Other jurors in chorus—"sSix Ten thousand dollars! lars! §150!" And there they were, back in the old place once more Finally the twenty- five thousand man gave up. He joined forces with the ten thousand dollar man' Because they were tired and hungry they allied themselves to the fifteen hundred dollar man. As the dinner hour passed the three ylelded place to one who advocated a verdict of $850. At this point the six: eent man spoke harshly of and to his companions and refused to talk further with them.. He took a seat in a remote corner, turned his chalr back upon them, placed his feet deflantly aganst the wal’ and smoked. cents! A thousand dol- “How about elght hundred?” shouted one of the compromisers, His answer sounded like a series of grunts, y “That fellow! 1 wouldn't give him house room, let alone eight hundred dol- lars. He'd be expensive at eight cents.” Imprecations from the others. De- rision over his shoulder from the im- movable one. A juror mounted a bench. “What am 1 bid for the heart of James Murray Mitchell?” he chanted. “Seven hundred seventy-five dollars.” jolng at seven hundred seventy-five.” “Seven hundred fifty!" shouted another in the faint voide of one a hungered. All looked at the man who had turned his back upon them. Was hope father to the thought that his feet had slipped to a less deflant angle? “Seven hundred thirty-five.” were slipping, “Seven hundred twenty-five, dred fifteen, seven hundred!" The feet of the deflant one struck the floor with a thud. “All right!" He rose, stretched, uttered something that rbymed unmistakably with “Oh, well!” “I'm hungry,” he went on. “This is not worth my losing my dinner, Give her a sympathy verdict, seven hundred, and let's go home.” lh.\nd m.lby the Jum;a' own tale, was @ appraisement of the stock value Mr. Mitchell's love made " The feet n hun-