Redding v. Redding
| Decision Date | 31 December 1912 |
| Parties | REDDING v. REDDING. |
| Court | New Jersey Court of Chancery |
Petition for divorce by George A. Redding against Margaret E. Redding. Decree advised refusing a divorce and dismissing the petition.
Jonathan Hand, of Wildwood, and Lewis Starr, of Camden, for petitioner.
Wm. Frank Sooy, of Atlantic City, for defendant.
GREY, Adv. M. The petition charged that the parties were married February 12, 1901, and that on October 22, 1903, defendant attempted to enter the bonds of matrimony with one William Sample or Semple, the marriage ceremony having been performed at Camden, N. J., on that date, and that defendant and Semple lived together as husband and wife from October, 1903, until May, 1904. The answer admits these charges of the bill, but asserts that defendant went through the marriage ceremony with Semple, believing her husband to be dead; that the petitioner sought her out in March, 1905 (she was not then living with Semple), and requested her to return and live with him and resume marital relations; that she thereupon went with him to Anglesea, N. J., although at that time and prior thereto petitioner knew of her attempted marriage to and of her living with Semple, and that the defendant and petitioner lived together as husband and wife from thence until May, 1912, when they parted by reason of cruel treatment on the part of the husband. The questions raised are entirely of fact. No legal principles are involved. From the facts admitted by the parties in the pleadings, and from the testimony taken, it appears that the parties were married in Philadelphia on the 12th of February, 1901. They quarreled and separated in October, 1902, and resumed marital relations again in December, 1902. They had another falling out in March, 1903, shortly after the birth of the only child, a daughter, and separated, not to again resume marital relations until March, 1905, during which period the attempted marriage and living with Semple by the defendant occurred.
There are but two issues in the case—one as to whether condonation has been proven, and the other as to who should have the custody of the child, if a divorce is granted.
The burden was upon the defendant to prove condonation. Various witnesses were called who swore that petitioner was fully aware of defendant's living with Semple as his wife for several months during the period of separation of petitioner and defendant from March, 1903, to March, 1905. This testimony of the defendant was contradicted by witnesses called for the petitioner, resulting in a very confused and unsatisfactory condition of the proofs. To ascertain the truth in this situation, it is helpful to scrutinize closely the character of the parties and their general conduct and their relations to each other. For this reason considerable latitude was given counsel in the examination of petitioner and defendant. George A. Redding, the petitioner, was engaged in the fish business at the time of his marriage. Since 1904 he has been borough clerk of Anglesea, N. J., at a salary of $500 a year and is still engaged in the fish business. In the summer of 1902 and 1903 he was employed as a life guard at Atlantic City. In the winter of 1902 he drove a wagon for Gimbel Bros. During the summer of 1904 he was employed at a hotel called "Singer's," a saloon in Atlantic City. On the witness stand he appeared to be a man of considerable physical power and bold in character. He testified that because his wife did not tell him in May, 1912, why she was leaving him, he swore at her, using such language as "to hell with you," and worse language not necessary to quote. In September, 1902, he wrote his wife a letter (Exhibit D 13), in which he said: —when, in fact, he testified he had not been to St. Louis, and had no job there. He was arrested in May, 1903, on a charge of theft, and was in jail about a week, and was then discharged, the grand jury finding no bill, but he forgot this episode, and also that he had written a letter from jail to Mrs. Redding, and it was only upon the production of the letter at the trial that he remembered his incarceration. He testified that while he and his wife were living together at Anglesea, after the Semple affair, he carried on correspondence and had seances with other girls. He swore that he had had no correspondence with other women within the last two years. He denied that he intended to admit adultery with any one when he testified that he had seances with other women. He seems to be fond of his child, and has voluntarily contributed $10 a month for the child's support since the separation in May, 1912.
Mrs. Redding, during the periods when she was separated from her husband (and not living with Semple) and at the time of the trial, was living with her mother, Mrs. Jones, either in Millville or Atlantic City. The testimony of various witnesses tended to show that, excepting the single instance of her illicit matrimonial adventure with Semple, she is a woman of good character, not addicted to drink, who took good care of her child, and when she kept house for her husband, the petitioner, he swore she took good care of him and the household. He said he believed she was true to him since they resumed their life together in March, 1905. Her appearance on the stand indicated to my mind a woman of somewhat weak or vacillating, but not of bad character.
Having in mind these general characteristics of the parties, the defendant offered evidence tending to show her husband's knowledge of her life with Semple. She says she lived with Semple until November, 1901; that they then parted, and she went to live at Millville, with her mother and her child. In the month of March, 1905, Mrs. Jones, the defendant's mother, having written to Redding that the child was sick, Redding, the petitioner, appeared at the Jones house, and a conversation occurred between petitioner and defendant, which the petitioner opened by saying, "What has become of your man?" to which she replied substantially that she had not any man, that he had gone. The man was not further discussed between them, and Semple's name was not mentioned. That same night Redding stayed with his wife at her mother's, and they resumed marital relations, and a few days afterwards he went to Anglesea, and she followed, and they lived together as man and wife until May, 1912.
This story of Mrs. Redding's is substantiated by her mother. Redding admits having received the letter from Mrs. Jones, the defendant's mother, and that, as requested by it, he went to Millville, and saw his wife, and arranged that they should live together again. In conformity with that arrangement, he says they shortly afterwards resumed marital relations at Anglesea, which continued until May, 1912. He denies, however, having held the conversation above referred to. Mrs. Yard, Mrs. Redding's sister, testifies that she made them a visit when petitioner and defendant were living together at Anglesea in 1905, and that the parties quarreled, and, in her presence, Redding said to his wife: "I am doing you a favor to live with you after you being married." Redding denies having made this statement. The next occasion when Redding is said to have disclosed knowledge of Mrs. Redding's relations with Semple was in January, 1907. Mrs. Redding testified that her husband showed her and read her two letters (which were offered in evidence). The first of these letters was contained in an envelope addressed, "Mrs. George Reading, Anglesea, New Jersey." The postmark on it reads, The letter itself, dated "12/28/06," starts thus: "Mrs. Sample or Mrs. Reading eather one will do I guess all right as yours father wishes me to tell you he has proofs that you have two Husbands living at this present time as youre Husband No. 2 visits us quite often." The letter contains frequent reference to husband No. 2. The second of these letters was contained in an envelope addressed to "Mr. George Redding, Anglesea, New Jersey, Book 106." It was postmarked Atlantic City January 3, 1907. The letter itself is dated "1/2/07," and begins: etc.
Mrs. Redding says she did not receive the letter addressed to her, above mentioned, until she was shown that letter and the one addressed "Mr. George Redding," that they were both shown to her by her husband in 1908. She says her husband read the letters to her, and said: "I am not going to pay any attention to it because somebody is going to try to make trouble again for us." Later she testifies that he said: She replied: To which he replied: "What if I did know?" and she answered: "Poor time to start trouble." Mrs. Cronin testifies as to these letters that she wrote the letter of December 28, 1906, to defendant, and received a reply signed, "George Redding." Although she did not know his handwriting, and did not know him personally, she took it to be his letter, and wrote the answer of January 2, 1907. She did not produce Redding's reply, and said she must have destroyed it with some other papers. Redding denies ever seeing the letters before the trial, and denies any conversations with his wife about them. I am inclined to believe the testimony of Mrs. Redding and Mrs....
To continue reading
Request your trial