River Falls journal. [volume] (River Falls, Pierce County, Wis.) 1872-2019, 1879-02-20
COLEMAN's WIVES.
UnhGppD Conclusion of q Romantic Mar
riGDe Behind the Bars.
IWashinofnn Rpnublican I

washington hepuDLcan.t
1t is scarcely reasonable to suppose that
man, while confined in prison, serving out a
sentence for violation of the law, would de-
liberately commit another crime having for its
effect a similar punishment, only the penalty
being more severe. But from evidence recently
come to light it is evident that such "A case
exists, and that the offender entertained neither
fear nor dread of the law when concentrating
his willingness. On the 14th inst. John b.
Coleman, a well-dressed and good looking
colored man, halling from Cincinnati, o., was
convicted in the criminal court of uttering
forged order on Col. Charles nj. Alexander for
the balance of wages due woman named
Garter, who had been performing services in
his family. His counsel represented that he
was a man of most excellent reputation, and
that instead of being the principal in the Of
Tense was the victim of others. Justice Wylie,
accepting these statements as true, was lenient
IN imposing sentence, and sent him to the
Albany penitentiary for one year.
1t seems that before the trial he had been
paying attention to Miss Alice F. Bradley, of
New Athens, o., and matters had progressed to
a betrothal, While waiting in Jail to be trans
ferred to Albany Miss Bradley gave evidence
of cOnstancy by consenting that the marriage
ceremony should be performed ere her lovers
departure. Incense was procured on Thurs
day, Jan. %, and Sunday last, accompanied by
her mother, she proceeded to the Jail to have
the knot tied. There Rev. VIM. Gibbons. of
several witnesses, at o'clock, did the work.
One hour was permitted the bride and groom
for honeymooning, and then ensued separa-
tiOn-he to enter the penitentiary and she to
live and wait his release. The new-made wife
took in the situation very philosophioally, re-
solving to make the best of it, and at the same
time try and secure his release by pardon.
This would all be very fine and proper could
the subsequent developments be left out of
the romance.
1t seems that Coleman had been previously
married and was not free to wed again. although
in Jail. The records at the clerks office show
that on Sept. 1, 1874, license to marry
taken out in the names of John b. Coleman, of
Cleveland, Ohio, and Amelia A. T. Hickman, of
this city, and that on the same day the couple
were married at the Fifteenth Street church by
Rev. George Van Dews.
On Sept. 4, 1878. Mrs. Amelia Ann Coleman
filed bill in equity for divorce from John b.
Coleman on the ground of desertion and aban-
dOnmeut. After reeiting that they were mar
lied in 1874 she stated that they lived together
until February, 1876, when be deserted her and
their child. This suit is now pending and has
been referred to Examiner Browning to take
testimony, and he has fixed the hearing for
Monday next.
1t is reported that these are not all the mar
risges that Coleman has contracted, and that
search might reveal that more wives exist than
either Misses Hickman Bradley had any idea
Of From the deliberate manner he entered
into the recent marriage 1t is not difficult to
excellent reputation given him before the court
He is not likely to be pardoned and if he
should. he will be compelled to stand trial fcr
bigamy, with the evidence of his guilt positive
against him and another trip 10 the peniten-
tiary certain.