MARRIED BY SPECIAL CONTRACT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXIV, Issue 10413, 10 April 1897, Page 2 (Supplement)

MARRIED BY SPECIAL CONTRACT.

BOTH SIGNED A UNIQUE DOCJJMENT. Caroline and Soloman A. Kusel are the parties to a contract marriage which has just been submitted to the Superior Court at San Francisco for dissolution. Kusel is 70 years of age, has children and grandchildren, and is rich. Mrs. Kusel is 50, and has been married before. She says her husband has treated her with cruolty, and she seeks to compel him to pay her as alimony an amount of money sufficient to keep her in comfort during the remainder of her days. Mr?. Kusel if as formerly Caroline Davis, a widow. For a long time before her marriage to Kusel she conducted a dry goods and furnishing goods business. Her marriage to the defendant occurred on Fobruary 6, 1896, and was accomplished through theosecution of the following contract :— We, the undersigned, have, upon the herein-contained conditions, agreed to marry and live together as man and wife. Now, therefore, it is stipulated and agreed that should there, alter our marriage, unfortunately arise discussions, dissatisfaction, or disappointment to disrupt our peace or happiness, or anv cause may arise whpre a separation, or the obtaining of a legal divorce, should be ureierable to the continuation of the bomi of matrimony or the living together, we do mutually disavow, disclaim, and waive all right to assistance in money or other value from each other, may tho same he for court fees, or lawyers' fees, or for alimony, or support, or maintenance, or the right, if any exist, to a claim for homestead, or for any purpose whatsoever. It is also agreed upon th.it any will made by either party beiore our marriage shall not be held invalid by reason of our marriage, or for any other reason, and shall be to the same effect as first intended Caroline Davis. i>l. A. Kusel. Mrs. Kusel's complaint was filed on December Bth last, and simply set up the fact of marriage without reference to the nature of the ceremony. The contract appeared in the case a fow days ago for the first, time on hearing of a motion by Mrs. Kusel to be allowed alimony, counsel fees, and costs pending the trial .if her suit. Aβ a defence to this motion Kusel set up tho contract as a waiver by his wile of all right to any allowance from his separate estate. Counsel for the wife met this defence with a claim that the waiver in the contract was void as against good morals and public policy. Judge Hebbard declined, however, to consider this quettion on hearing of the motion. Pending tho trial, he said, he felt constrained to recognise tho contract. It followed, therefore, that the motion for an allowance ptndtnle lite must be denied, and the Court so orderetl.