This is Part 2 of Louisa’s Love Affair!

Charles Barnes was not a man to be deterred, once he had a mission in mind. He had decided he would marry Miss Pierce, and he was determined to do it.

And he did. On May 13, 1900, several days after they were refused a marriage license in Newton, Massachusetts, Charles Barnes married Miss Louisa Pierce in Newburgh, New York.

The bride was 74, the groom, 32. Little was known of Charles Barnes, except that he had born in Washington, D.C. and was in medical school. He was frequently referred to as Dr. Barnes in the papers, both before and after he obtained his medical license.

Though little is known of the actual marriage ceremony, it was confirmed that Charles Barnes’ parents were witnesses. I wonder what they thought of the occasion. The bride, of course, was 13 years older than her new in-laws.

The Boston Globe treated the report of the marriage as a rumor or a joke in poor taste.  The New York Times, however, took the story at face value.

Boston Globe, left. New York Times, right

The New York Times did give a nod to the unusual circumstances, reporting:

“Previous to the marriage Miss Pierce underwent a searching examination at the hands of three New York physicians at her own request. They decided that she was of sound and disposing mind, and as far as her mental condition was concerned had a perfect right to do with her property as she saw fit.

Then in the presence of many of the relatives of Mr. Barnes the ceremony took place. There was no attempt at concealment and no opposition from those who had been making such a bitter fight to circumvent the young man. The first act of Mrs. Barnes, it is stated, was to make over to her husband all her property, worth at least $75,000…It is asserted here that, inasmuch as the marriage was impossible In Massachusetts on account of permission being refused by the authorities. it will not be recognized as legal in this State, although perfectly so in New York. The statute is very explicit on this point.”

I get the feeling that the Times sympathized with the couple, as if they were an early version of Harold and Maude. However, the prompt signing over of all Louisa’s property calls this into question. The exact amount of her fortune varied wildly in the reporting. If it was $75,000, as the New York Times claimed, her estate would be worth approximately $2.7 million dollars today.

But concerns for the well-being of Louisa—now Mrs. Barnes—continued.  She and her new husband initially lived in her home, which was called the Barnes homestead by the papers.  Charles’ parents also moved in with the couple.

Almost immediately, there was rumors of serious issues within the Barnes marriage. Several legal motions were filed and withdrawn without explanation. In June 1902, Mrs. Barnes claimed that her husband had gone to Los Angeles and deserted her.  She remained at her home in Newton, with her in-laws.

Charles Barnes

Then, in November 1902, a little over two years after her marriage, an article announced that Mrs. Barnes was missing. “That she has been spirited away and is being kept in hiding from her friends, the latter openly assert and are exerting every effort to find her,” the Boston Globe reported.

Stay tuned for Part 3!