The evening world. Newspaper, April 1, 1921, Page 2

j } ihe ie « u ~ A ! ‘2 THE EVENING WORLD, FRIDAY, APRIL 1, 1921. Co Sw K een _ JUSTICE MORSCHAUSER’S DECISION IN THE STILLMAN CASE" Cire = apehe their day m court, or perhaps sev- | tettor of the law demanded, and when | ‘ 4 h I hope to do next week,’ 1 think that the action of the employers tas re- fof wort were affec ted in rookiys, | |Franci8eo Ratiroad reduced fram eral days, as to matters affecting} by statute the disqualification was| this was not a confidential communi _MISSING IN BALLOON | | sutted Ow virtual lockout Staten Istind, and’ Now Jersey. t i wept per it, Uprdlas mr cation within the inhibition of the WITH CREW SINCE ! cha: tae Gite le activity inf Month's notice of ine eut had Kurn, Presid: Announeed: | ft Shem, and this all means time, labor | removed allowing husband and wifo| oa. of civil procedure. (sec. 831).' | and the expenditure of moncy.” to testify as against each other and| “It is a debatable | ° bNbeit ade Aiea A hdl DAA dad A pippeesl | tb ipedtuia oe gt 5 question whether | ling here for some monty: but . tae RE bee Ry be a ‘This was regarded as a definite intl-| compelling them to testify the rule soul A a should e received | MARCH 22 LAST poe than sixty jobs were stdeted-in| "2 ‘ro reported tet The out c t+ de fE/due eauplo yore we file t one or the eet upon plaintiff's aifidavit: unaccom- ae sy ios was made necessary, ‘decoMling to the |‘ r sb rete ae a” Lee mui still obtained and did not affect the) pinta “by other afliduvite, Matters 7 — March, many of which are dow Wed! ownora, ny wage reductions ‘in the ——— tedesines, Bnet dlereion pred exclusion of privileged oommunica- plaintiff Cannot testify to on the (rial ‘é e “ap. ya in other cities, Workers Vote 10 Per cent, Nedtettonst tions between the spouses undo: the] hearing on the merits or special pro-| oR, No ¥,. Apel) 1], According to “John | sors ‘Business BUPRALO. ROCHEST Aprfl 1—twe th uwand futile. But the intimation was modi- Agent of Local Noy 124, Interfationu jcommon law rules, {t Is applicable, Ccoding under Soc, 881 of the ¢ % amour 6 Woe =} Brothe vl ‘| J employer ne? ig fied by the further statement: “The |tnough torminuted % divone or by Of CIVIL Procedure te should not Ww EE oe Hed Cea aaeatc Rie ate altieeed In ookio: “tare GoMpRay Wwe eaced ior tel charges against the defendant (Mra. 4 permitted to place in an attdavit on a ess In Rochester Ix tied up todays | nt Ue at huurg mo nawt este tol tha Company Nave voted thenigeives a 18 the death of one of the p ti men in the Uuilding trades refus.fcut, ald there had been no meethigs tofler Cont. wage reduetiun, ef rties: motion of this kind when the defend- “Letters between husband and wife ant objects, He cannot testify to the ‘Stillmar) are very serious and mo- consider the reducti Monday, The cut wilt include the y to re rt to work this morning | he poner Sates vary watious te har | Are Withie the protection of tho ruto, handwriting of tho defendant ot of the ps | penduse bra reliuotion ih Wagei ewer | ie dowiue Re able oi ee quences wou! Tr - - res ponde n actions of this kind P ’ ‘ > 3 : Gown, ne employeos stated thut the future, even it abe should succeed in| 2 *T* OTM! communications, and the “Phe husband or wife in actions for nt 4,000 Mecha in Worcester ert conferences have been held of NO CUT IN THIS TRADE. Jeep made on thelr own in mastaining the charges against the contents thereof cannot pe disclosed divorce founded on adultery \s per- | ¥ late fm an effort to arrive @t an es ; ittative of progeut business Pe be wal unloas the privilege is waived. (Bow. mitted to testify to the marriage or and 2,000 in Lawrence : pee atiece to ten| 12000 White Goods Workers wre ind Industrial conditions Chath plaintife.’ ‘i hi disprove the allegations of adultery. aereement, but labor refuses After ieeut, caddies Mra. Suitmen'e right to make a |™*® ve Patrick, 32 Hed. Rep. 363; and soc. Kl of the Code did not ' Quit code from {ts position that there sophine Soc. 5 ; A threatened strike of 10,000 w ‘ defense In acknowledged not | H°PkIns vs. Grimshaw, 166 U. 8. 34.) but gave the right xenerally ‘to dis. Domest must be no reduction, Jers in tho white’ goods Industry én HUMANE” AGENTS: INBATTLE 4 In the Bowman case the wife's ad- P tions of adultery,’ to her own sake but for the in- show that t allegation was not of her children. true, and that the defendant ‘The Court orders that the ehtiaren | letters oi her husband relating to could not only deny, but could yy | matters In a suit in which he was then testify to any fact or eireumatance es 2 : ty most florea La al io interested. ‘The administrator in a Within dofendant's knowledge, com- - “4 |General Electric at Chicago) % mother manner to which the petent and material, on the question ‘fare accustomad. Except for Guy Still- spirit of hostility to the husband de- Qs to whether (he act as charged was man, the court says, they are gid ‘MENBOTADY, April 1. — The {York ‘has Been ave 20PER CENT. REDUCTION sehencotady , Railway “Company, ih lance by manufactur lett rs received by union officials to-| demande for an jay, announced it would cut wases|no wage reductions per cent. May 1. This will restore A deadlock. bad proveiled for several he rate of 45 cents an hour paid a] woexs after the worl Announces a Decrease Af- | year’ ‘ago. | fecting 25,000. fident the was One Weld ov Charge of Threaten ing te Shoot the Other Harry Moran, thirty-elpht. of No ‘Ige Wast Mth Street, Huniane Sortety agent, was held to-day tn $1,000 ball In had+ rejected }the Besex Market Court of the com per cent. wage cut. > ement provides mimi. Dlaint ‘of Willlum Beckett, art’ sient o a z ed throug ‘adcept- rs of the’ union's feomant embodytig ministrator found among her pauper livered the letters to the other side, committed. » they ‘are con- | the proposed als e question will be erb- f . which sought to use them, and the let- ACCUSED MAY TESTIFY IN SELF mum wage ecales for "week -workera}Uie American Society for the Preve srr pan agra bait currant te ye on eee DEFENSE. | mitted to arbitration, aud an extra hhalf-holiday ‘on iecton | Yon of Cruelty to Animals, Ma Wickets ehuwrabes ishet be wath “In the Hopkins case, Mr. Jus: | "In Biers vs. Biers (156 App. piv. ! WORCESTER, Mass. April 1 ‘BUILDING HALTS i Mc sca tN Ss aca De lejg treo gel loge Mores hadi tice Gray, delivering the opinion | 409) at Page 411 the learned Justice + ey heated argument over a case in, coun; ol i >, Practically al) the building work in : Glent to care for them when they @/ oF the court, on page 34 id: | (McLannan, P. J.) said: “This sec- bak side Seanad IN MIDDLE WEST R. R. OFFICIALS’ PAY CUT, | yesterday when the latter drew a re nd threatened to shoot, him, a8 surprised,” said “Beckétt?”! 2 reat would come from: hurr but 1 opened my cog! with her. | Worcester was suspended to-day The doctsion onds with an impres- sive assertion of the rights of the buby tion has been held to mean that the ‘At common law, upon grounds — ajlejed guilty party is not limited to of public policy, husband and denying specifically the charges of wife (with some exceptions not adultery, but may tostify to any fact Gey. desortbed as “one person in thi¥| here material) were pial permit: or circumstance within his or her ease s0 young and innocent as not| tq even b } knowledge, competent and material, . ¥ consent, to give eo on the question as to whether the i | t tho wrted on the sais MP eaberetand wink eile action Is All| anes for or against oleh ether, | ach abt onnrgod was commitiod | ee Scale. about, and wil) not understand wntil| or to testify even after the end- (Huntley vs, Huntley, 73 Hun, 261 fobs as usual this morning to see cian KONI ieicenmecatlon he comes to an age of understanding.| jing’ of the marriage relation by | Stevens vs. Stevens, 54 1D 490 O'Haru | QUARTER MA\ Gr [tne master builders had changed | work in a number of Middle Western | plaintif Is succeasful against the! death or divorce, to private com- : va O'Hara, 136 App. Div. 378.') \ TRAINS ON. inrremen. their minds about making the cut in jcities was halted following the re-| + ' qh, the child will bear a stain that! munications which took place be- “The effect of theso decisions is ctive to-day, and when in- |fusal of iuilding trades workers to @annot be erased and for which he !s| tween them while it lasted,’ ———- Frisco Orders Redaction when inembers of the organized 7 ecer 20 Ver Cent. tn Sal Duilding trades struck against a re-| Mey in Trades Refuses tocAccept| c humane, efiteer., but I oben ' ST. LOUIS, April: 1.--Salaries ‘of! ™ Moran’ will be given a hearing Arti | duction of 20 per cent. in their pay Cuts Made in Wage exeoutives of the St. Louis and San'4 on the charge of felonious aswuil. that in order to ‘disprove the allega- Chief Quartermaster George K.|pay off tion of adultery’ the party charged formed by the foremen that the cut accept ions in pay scheduled Lesson in Addition pected of any mother.” It is also the} the wife to the husband which is Mass, April 1—| wort $ at Sloux City refused to a . Wilkinson Was in Command 0 e 0- oat 0 not responsible. “in Millapatigh ve. )Potter, (2. | tne’ chttee Cake tot ee tote tee f the Lost A-5S97 was in effect they quit and reported |to take effect today. | Most of te) Oérs. Stillman comes to the defense | App. Div. 521), Mr. dustice Smith | they were procured to be committed of the Lost A-5597. at the headquarters. Union leaders | ¢) conters quit work at Dubuaue, | Faace-oaamn | b> Ac om a Seca anak idle iebal had. Fania SEL aie naeeia iy hed hen) Chenwae Chit Qnartermaster George [report that between 4,000 and 6,000 |) 44 white In Waterloo, carpenters | : says, “as is her duty” and “thie is cx-| soyght to prove a confession by have “heen fonsiven and condoned’ | 1 Wilkinson, {# in command |men have stopped work land brick masons were idle, Union} | and at page 413 the learned Justice | of the naval balloon A-5597, SPRINGFIELD, j \ duty of the Court, he adds. clearly within the protection of | said: ‘It is urged by the respondent! which Building trades workmen in this city, cept a pay cut, and 1,500 m were ent | has been missing wince ft : , : ° ’ In commenting on the docision,| the statute. fat one Provisions of Rectlon $8) Are) eft the naval alr tution at Pen~ | Chicopee, Holycke and Greenfield | Fepnrind jait tn, Des Maines pending | For Friday and Saturday, April 1 and 2 John F. Brennan, of counsel for Mrs,| “Judge Parker in Warner vs. tho pana or wite trom teatl i lay rather than | {ale | 7 7 sacola, Fla, reh 22. The | went on strike to- ing nasinst | Me ' reduotlons Union officers clatmed 4,000 men} Stillman said to-day: “While T am|P, P. Company (182 N. Y. 181) on the other upon the issue of adultery balloon carried a crew of five. accopt wage engaged in nstruct Chocolate Covered Ice Creams 24¢ n work in not quite satisfied with the counsel |page 185 said: ‘The evidence offered!" an action for absolute divorce, | f nave In Holyoke about 1,000 men failed Onlana, Neb, quit. we to-d Con- | as there has been and will be | could have no purpoi ful to the ; ind that if other lenuesd are tondered | ene Grae Hes erent ac to appear for work to-day and no t mtriction work in St. lout POUND BOX purpose useful to the \ hy the defendant, such as conniv- lost. Planes and dirigibles are | blk haat . As 8 1 following refusal L iS If B t Ti ffi expense in conducting the fu- | defendant mniess It tended to show ance, or condonation, cither party! still #earching for the lost uero- | €fforts bave been made to adjust mont finishers and coneret ondon tyle Butter foffee Je made|to accept a 20 per c ture motions and the trial, there will |that during such a converastion with ; 1 be no appeal on my part” Three | or husband she said or did, or omit- firms of lawyers, tepresent Mrs. Still- ted to say or do something from stify without restraint upon; nauts, \aifteronces. ‘The waxe h Ismues, We are unable to agree | effective to-day reduces wages fit with this contention, | teen cents an hour. | TYPO UNIONS RESTRAINED. nt, pay cut fT Rather j which it might be inferred that there | “Tt 1s contrary to tho plain read-| person having personal knowledge THE ANSWER—Both for.............. 68c oo existed an unlawful intimacy be- | ing of the statute and the language of the facts and who is legally com-| 1m Greenfield 200 carpenters and an : j 5 Justice Morschauser has intimated ;tWeen her and Smith.’ {of the section has been strictly ap- potent to testify under oath (Cyc jequal number of painters went on Masanchusetts Court Orders No In- |} But you don’t have to buy both specials. You can purchase them singly $5 % that a separate allowance is to be| CONVERSATIONS OF COUPLES, Plicd by the courts in all cases, 80° vol. 2, p. 5). strike to-day to resist a wage reduc- | terference With Phe Company. | at the prices named above. en | Valentine vs. Valentine (87 App., Div. which these exhibits ‘BY to ‘h' may | ble to find, In here are numero made later for John FE. Mack, guar-| PROTECTED BY STATUTE, | {if as we have t @ian to Guy Stillman. “A conversation on such @ subject | 156), it was held error to allow the! be made com hundred craftsmen are out in Ch . dh 4 A or to won ympetent and proved, but | hundred c Mra. Stulman’s attorneys announced | Detwren husband and wife seems to | wife to testify against her husband | not by the testimony of ti Atif? {copes and about 50 in this city. The us to be clearly within the protec: | concerning his property and ineome. | aL 8 that as soon as the alimony order! tion of the ata be pron and ineome./or by his affidavit, where objection |Chipee and Springfield strikers are | methods by | tion from 80 to 75 cents an hour. One | SPRINGFIELD, Mus April 1—A | permanent injunction, copies of which re received yesterday, hus been! EXTRA SPECIALS MILK CHOCOLATE COVERED PARLAYS —Each bar a candy lunchean | statute, In Dickinson vs. Dickinson (43 Hun., | e by the Supreme Court cestruin- | tself. Delicious and Nourishing. ‘Big bars of California Honey Nou-, | _ had bean entered thoy would submit| “The appollant calls our attention, §16), i wus held error to permit tho | oT ade thereto. employees of u Holyoke contractor he Typographical and Printing |] gat, rolled in caramel, then covered sth Chopoed Pacan' Nudd ead laste » a new motion to amend Mrs. Still- RR GT pax chaotnar ree th ah vs. ne ‘plaintife to testify to the fact of her; EXHIBITS SHOULD NOT BE CON- | No definite stops toward a wage re- ‘s Unions from interfering | blanketed with our famous Premium) Milk Chocolate. | man's defense by alleging intimacy | Mage Hurl, in speaking for the evurt, | memaence where AUS Ne ele SIDERED. duction have been taken here [with the Phelps Publishing Company, || Regular price 99c, Extra Special for: Friday and Sat+ between Mr. Stillman and a woman | said What ar confidential commu: | pinn, 12 Hun., 339; Taylor vs aasine: “Tho exhibits should not be con- | LAWRENCH, Mass. April 1—Ke- Phe decree overrules the exceptions || urdayy Pound Box, pred by me upon this motion, other than Mrs. Leeds, whose name! Pications within the meaning of the) {22 App. Div. 220; Colwell vs, Col- seotion? Clearly not all communica: | ; are many statements in the re Whey Pave not ascertaine#, | Hone made betwoen husband and wite |} aia BOT SO; iA) ve Brnes, BS ive uffidavits of pluintift und de- [20 per © Referee Gleason said that no date| when alone ®*®* They. are such| |fendant that J believe are tot com- | mechan fusing to accept a wage reduction of! of the defe nt, more than 2,000 building | tt failed to report for work | a ant unions and gontirms report of a. sp tons of fac CHOCOLATE COVERED cla! master on | had been fixed for resuming the tak-| communications an are expresily IF OFFENSE I$ CONDONED, pelent in a caso of this kind. 1 did |nere to-day. In a few instances Con pamipy Comune Naa weowehe, by sno CREAM PEP-’| { ftentint, Ge , not consider them on this motio i a ds iMinlhe eps ANY as the result of a \ eee ¥eisenee before wre MTR Waltretor induced Bi PLAINTIFF CAN'T DISPROVE iT ee riclioved they. violated the | (™ctors who Nave only a few men «trike for a minimum wage of $40 by || PERMINTS— | JUSTICE MORSCHAUER’S DE- the marital relations. fea hile ohareed could tens | rule did not enforce the reduction and) the Yeograph pate n, which af. The melt in your, | “Clearly, the definition given does! Uy to nding to deny the} The plaintiff presents with his fal abana waked aa Usual d job and book concerns in this | ISON IN UPC RG: pe ey; tne aenltion’ given doe6| chargon made, or to prove shal Wey] affidavit. the testimony taxon ae. {cree empovess worked ax utUal. | | viciaity, mouth kind that . ‘The text of Justice Morschauser's | 2°t defendant desired to prove from| Were procured to be committed or) the hearings before the learned he master Muilders ¢ / t the exclusive con- decision follows: | the protection af the statute. Its na- : fectioner says “This motion is made by the de-| ture waa not only confidential, but it| the marriage, |condoned at by the other party to] referee as to the acts and conduct | those who failed to report for werk! SHIPYARD WAGES CUT. | lg or that the offenses! of the defendant. She denies these [are on strik 13 pounds. Tha that) ‘ | have buen forgiven or condoned, the} H sUaleha bile dd SUB ey i | - $1.00 per pound, rice is ® fendant, Anno U. Stillman, for per~| was apparently induced by tho mar-| shinciq by his testimony could not aoe ere earedaiea searcher hes : ‘Ten Per Cent. Off Pay of A We say FE KORARE: mission to serve an amended answer ood that 5 a & topic mania have disprove it. ‘The decision in the Biers} pot been examined. The defend- | best that Is in him, bringing Into! ees im New York Dintriet To-Day. || POUND BOX care was ove ome by an amendment| ant has amended her anewer and | Dluy all the learning and ability that! Rogue and for alimony and counsel fee. Th) been the mrbject of diseu lon but) to F » code by CI e ects from one placed in| fon in waxes of 10 per cent plaintiff consented to the granting of | for the existence of such relation be- | {g,54o1yn St) 01 the enn by Chanter! charges acta and conduct upon sree postion of trust. "The inter: | Went Wnt effect in all shipyards in tho | the onder for perminsion to serve an|tween the partion, | | ove rif upon sucH (rial or such hear-| eho pisingyf of fim oan he Jeats of the defendant and of the in-|New York district to-day, ‘Thousands | amended anawor, but opposed the) ,,,,4 further test by which to deter | ing tha party against whom the ille-| Snd°suoh acts are supported by | fant In thix case are to a xrewt ex- motion for alimony and counsel fce. confidential is suggested by the | Raion of Adultery is im: de produces! affidavits of different perso Nate Att «ana ciuch cand)tuo “Before deciding the motion, I deem learned Judge in characterizing the lence tending to prove any o 4 She does not seek a divorce bu’ bs iebe | . ie (defense thereto mentioned in Section | nature of the conversations sought | MAE Hin GEE ie RenRE DAFty Imeocae it proper to pass upon the exhibite: i, excluded in that case He said: “Pxhibit ‘A.’ The alleged letter! “phey were ontinary convernations re- Perea testity in disproof of any! acts and conduct as charged | from defendant to plaintiff and the| lating to matters of business which [Such defense . against each other are sustained ina bringing oniiany| exhibits ‘B' to 'H' inchusive, conaist-| there Is no reason to auppose he| 9"Mr Nichols, in his work un New| neither will be entitled to a de- i ; my an hace id would have been unwilling to hold in| York Practice, vol. 1, p. 547, sa'd:| eree. vd mn Pye BOR) Re: ing of letters alleged to have been! the prenonce of any person! |"The question as to whether a person| “Seq. 1758—When dive denied, |e and protracted: trisl.. It ehould) written by the cv-respondent to de-/ "It cannot be supposrd that both | incompetent to testify’ as a witness! although adultery proved. ‘In either he ad maid that all ¥ ‘ian Ry d | fendant and received by her and husband and wife would have been | can make an affidavit which will be! of the following cases the plaintife | (At should geen heard, t : willing to discuss such a subject inj considered, and the effect thereof, Is, is not entitled to a divorce, although | Means money a me, labor and ef- claimed :o have been delivered sub-|i}, preacnce of other persons or of considerable interest, but no posl-| the adultery is established: (sub-)f0Pt. Proper provision must be made sequently to the plaintiff. The de-| would have consented to a repetition | tive rule has been laid down in regard | division 46), where the plaintif? has |f® Meet the conditions presented | fendant objects to the use of these |of the conversation by either party to | thereto in thly State. It has been held| also been guilty of adultery, “1 believe the counsel fee should = | xhibits by plaintiff, Section 831 of |!t: Tis nature, and the relation of the that whore the testimony of the such circumstances, that th be allowed in the sum of thirty- e 7 0! 9 parties forbade the thought of its | plaintiff would be incompetent, by, fendant would have been entitled, if] five thousand dollars ($35,000) mistake should be made. Tt should) not be permitted to be made. Litiga- tion is expensive and it me and ligation anticipated in ls recrimination against the defendant as a defense. If the BONWIT TELLER & CO. The Specalty Shop of Oxginaions the Code of ‘Civil Procedure provides | iy ing told to others, and the Jaw | reason of {ts relating to a transaction. innocent, to a divorce.’ and twelve thousand five hundred ET | med it with that weal of conti: | with deceased person, the plaintiff's “If these charges are dollars ($12,500) be allowed for FIFTH AVENUE.AT 387" STRE) and dence whith the parties In auch a) amMidavit is not alone sufficient to sup-| fished the plaintiff and expenses. husband and | situation would fee! no occasion 10/ port an injunction and the appainte| ant will find. themecives “During the pendency of the wife not competent witness; when | mach, | ment of a receiver, and that a peraun| same position as before the com- action the defendant andthe chil- | competent—a husand or w'fe Is | paiR NOT COMPELLED TO BE | xerving @ wentence on a conviction | mencement of the action, except get Ad thls stale den the Ips Mak competent to teutity guider SMIRCH EACH OTHER. | for felony, cannot make an aM-| that they will have had their day ; h M Uf O * ‘S \ (We other, upon the trial of em | vin Hanover vs, House) (28 Appl Grebe e BULa Ce ta at | 2 galt, at necodne seynre aye, Prarie children except the infant A ost nusual ering aturday jon, the hearing upon the | Div. 801) sald Mr. Justice Sewell on) poo al a 18 h , are of sufficient age to 1 action, or the ee up pie S08: ‘It is equally clear that the | People ex rel Lord va, Robertson, 26| this all mea' ime, labor and pda dal Gara ahamahay Ree Merits of 4 special proceeding, | Pore aia aot err in excluding the at- | How: P. Tt. 90.) | the expenditure of money. determine with whom they desire | founded upon an allegation «f | ndavit of the wife, or that part of the| | uy the case of the People ex ret! “The children must be maintained | $0.76 | cept to prove the mar- | co tion between her and the) Lom supra, an ingotvent debtor was!and the defendant must be main-| S6em ee Seen ee ae Patt aa plaintift. which tented to show that| disqualified from making an attidavit; tained and supported in a manner ‘Their preferenc should contr Pe Fldge or disprove the allegation of [FY rendant had had criminal in-| to bis petition for hia discharge from | corresponding to her rank and posi- |the circumstances as now presented. adultery. However, if upon such ¥ , The ra not] imprisonment under the olvent | tion and the fortune of her husband. |While the children are with the Cee eT hee wy Peo teote aia ate ther or in her charge, she must trial or hearing the party agalort only confidential, but they were ap-| jaws, and Mr. Justice Lott said at) We must look to all the circumstance: j mo! i a Per GRAbRBs. BnG: oust Whom the eilegatlon at aduitary [parentiy induced dy the marital re-|pagess1and 92: "The disqualification @f the particular cage, In order to | provide for thelr school 1 other ‘ lation and clearly within the prohibi-| is general. It extends to all casas| Ward what ls fair and just between | necessary expense ; 0 | ts made produces evidence tending | tin of Section 881 of the Code of| Where the declaration of the party | the parties, for no two cases are alike. | meet the aon iit ne, the ql Imony to prove any of the defensea | Civil Procedure, which provides that) je bo used in a judicial proceeding for | The charges against the defendant |ahould be allowed Vn sie: RUE of heret, tioned in Sec, 175 ‘a husband or wife shail not be com-! the purpose of establishing or proving usand fv thereto mentioned in & 1758 of anit ‘4, or without the consent of the, some fact; and it applies both to writ- | if sustained, the consequences would 500) per nt eae this act, the other party is com- ther, if living, allowed to digclose a| ten and oral evidence, It 1s not lim-| b¢ very serious to her future, even ‘Order may be presented in ac- Pere danti 0 : 3 if she should succeed in sustaining {cordance herewith and when signed | Several Diversified Types in TAILORED SUITS of TRICOTINE and TWILL CORD for WOMEN TT are very serious and momentous and, petent to testify in disproof of any | anfidential communication made by) ited to testimony or evidence on the t } ; H 5 if : e other ¢ nar + | trial of ca wetween pares, bi the charge! inst the plaintiff, This |the Stay vacated and the pro- buch defense. "A husband or wite |e, ti the oihet turing atragg.” | rat ot extn betwen party hut in| Re,OhaPReR ugalnal the PIAINIT, ANS | the A Ae iad totes ata ong Straight and Belted Silhouettes hall not be compelled, or without 110° tharee of adultery where the| criminal TOLDB Aare UROn. BE the consent of the other, if ving, | communications were held not ty be The provision is intended as a| allowed to disclose a confideatial |confidential. In actions for alienation! rule of evidemce and as protection cominunication made by one to | of & wife's affection proof of the iMl| to the community against the peril the other during marriage. treatment of the wife by the husband | of testimony from a person guilty of It la her right to make a vigorous | time and f effort to meet the proof that may be | tween the parties, and if the parties | presented against her and to present |cannot agree the learned referce may | her defense, not only for herself but | fix the time and place. for the interests of her children. | | Guide Says His Tstimeny Wilh Aid) EXCEPTIONALLY PRICED AT jis competent: profane and abus ve! an offense implying such derelict THE PATHETIC SITUATION OF | ait | ‘Communications and transactions! janguage used by him to her is not 2) of moral principle in Ure opinion of BABY GUY. en shader | 65 00 between husband and wife were early | confidential communication, (Mills- | the Legislature to carry with it the | she awe aay MONTRDAL, April 1 ; i A a fe recogn: : ithe gh vs. Potter, 6u ) prosumption of a total disregard to "Aside fromm hese considerations, | vais, changed with boing the father of could oped al bppeapheas Benes | “In Fowler va Fowl r, 38 .N. Y, at. | the obligations of one |there is one person in this case who! sprs, James A, Stillman's t penne bo jose what} ron. 746, It wan held that declarations | “Insolvent proceedings are very |! 80 young and innocent as not to | declared to-day that Tai i a hi i $e took place between them and neither |imego hy a hoshand to his wife the| Important in thel ry understand what this action iy all| sought as a witness for sti Tailoring of a high order characterizes these consequen was a competent witness to testify as| second night after the marriage that] tending, In some cases, to the ox and will not understand until | latter's diverse sult DOU Abso- he comes to AN age of understanding |. “BUt when It was found that my suits in strictly tailored or embroidered to such transactions or communica- he did not love her and had mace a} lute disregard of debts, and in others ee tite is Senet ee he | ful statements wo ldn't help Mr mistake in marrying her, which was}limiting parties in the remedics for, '{ pluintife is successful against the | ian 1 was given up by attor ‘ * ; $ Hons of confidential nature or i }the beginning of a coursd of til treat. | their collection, and affidavits of the Child, the child will bear a stain tbat | Boaivuis wald. "if { am cated upon to models—self folds applied in design, unique duced by the marital relation. From! ment, was not a privileged communi- experience jt was found that far jess | cation. [less stringency, to guard against applicant are 'requred, of more or | C&AnOt be erased and for which he | tostify, my evidence w Suman.” to do that which he believes Is his| Beauvais said he was positive Mrs. 1 hep Mrs is not responsible, ‘The plaintiff seeks pockets and collar treatments add distin~ ds lire, ane’ f + < ‘evil would result from the exclusion Norris va. Leo (136 app. div, 685)| fraud, and for the protection of tho | . hildre: he | Stillman would win her’ case : : re santa On on & promissory note| tights of croditora (o be affects duty to himself and his children, The | § ° ind h hes z of such testimony than from Its ad- | wae MD Me en aed wife A iets | them. Hitors to be affected PY Diaintitt having challenged the pa- | guishing touches. ternity of the child, the defendant mission, It may in individual cases | \ as written by the husband to] “Tl therefore, asm \ l y ter was written by the husband to rm herefore, as 0 ‘eomes to its protection, and to the * work hardship, but the destruction | his wife to ehronicte his dally doings more reason for disquall pee PE a ash yea . and stating that he would settle with, son convicted of a felony from mak- @efense of its ley | #f confiaance between a husbacd and) fo Det when he obtained cer-|ing such an affidavit thore is to his is her duty if sho is right in Id h misery and wife would cause much misery @Bd) iii, qnoneys, It was held that such/ disqualify him from being a witness her claims. She vigorously ch, affect the marriage reiativn. This) jeter would not be exciuded as aon trial of a cause between third per- pions the child's cause und this |9 ex- i rule is founded upon sound public | confidential communication, sons. peeted from any mother, Hey, “The learned presiding justice of| “The effect and extent of the dis-| “Our law in Its wisdom provides for pol FIDENCES OF COUPLES) {M Appellate Division in this depart-|ability created by the statute of a the care and protection of those who | CON: ment, Mr. Justice Jenks, said on page similar character in England was dis-, cannot protect themselves, especially SHOULD BE PRIVILEGED. 486; "The letter is an ordinary epiatie cussed and considered in re Sawyer! infants and those of tender years, wy “Phose living in the marriage rela-| wherein the fiusband writes to his; Adol and Bilis, N, $. P., 721), and) There is such an infant in this case. ‘should not be compelled or| Wife t chronicle the weather, his! it was held to extend to an aMdavit ‘The infant 's made a defendant and ton | daily doings his efforts to fi A which had heen naed to show onuse its paternity js questioned, Tho} silowed to betray the mutual trust} summer place for the family, and against a rule calling upon another | courts are charged with the duty of nd confidence which such reiation| such petty masicrs, qt seontelas é party to answer certain matters, and protecting it, ns jac | When modified .| single rentence which might be perti- the court urdered the affidavit to be “In this case the Jnfant is repre- | imahien. oa oe iala~| heats ‘T wil gettle with your mbther taken off the files (see algo in ‘Green. sented by an honored and. eminent tive enactment, no wider Fprota-| just as soon as I van got my hafids on leaf on Evidence,’ Section 374.) member of the bar, who will protect | _ Hyp bas been given than the plain the money from the mortgege yich ge aitidavit waust be made by «| the infant's interests and «ive the! “Te certainly adds the ‘pal’ to my ‘pal- ate’’’ remarked Bess, helping herself for the fifth time to Other Tailored and Costume Suits for Women 45.00 to 350.00 : VOMEN’S SUIT DEP’T--SECOND FLOOR