The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1884-12-26
THE SHARON-HILL CASE.
Brief Reorganization of the TestimOny-Con-
Guiding Remarks of the Judge.
San Francisco Special,


acting here for some weeks past, when the di-
vorce suit of Sarah Altha Hill against eX-Sena-
tor Sharon was given to the jury. The Hill
Sharon suit has been one Of those remarkable
eases which seem to be indigenous to California
soil, and which could scarcely have existed in
less highly rarefed atmosphere than that which
chagacterizes this inviting coast. The story has
been told in fragmentary dispatches, but its in
terest is almost perennial The spectacle OLA
we'll born, highly educated and beautiful woman
seeking divorce from man 10 whom she was
never married, and whom her family mentally
rejected as their daughters inferior in in
tellect and social position, is in itself
a most unusual phenomenon. But to the
primary absurdity of Miss Hills position many
new absurdities were added as the case
progressed. 1t was shown that in her endeavors
to revive the tagging devotion of Sharon, hiss
Hill secretely Piled him with harmless draughts,
for which she paid ridiculous prices to pro
feSslonal compOunders of so-called love potl0nS.
She wore next her heart one of the eX senator's
stockings, which had been baptized in whisky,
and over which the mystic words of a sooth-
sayer had been spoken. Parts of oharons
wearing apparel were pourloined from his room
at the Palace Hotel, and in lonely cemetery at
midnight they were placed beneath coffin in
newmade grave, the theory being that by devices
such as this delinquent love might be reganed
Persons were promised large sums of money to
swear to the existence of a marriage contract
gave their testimony, repented, confessed
themselves as purjurers and denounced the
nuptial compact as forgery. Miss Brackett
the young woman who accompanied Miss
Hill on her weird visit to the cemetery, and
who was to be the plaintiffs chief witness dis
appeared in the midst of the trial. and the ele-
ment of tragedy was not lacking for one OF the
woman witnesses, whose early life was too
inn into paH
pulled derringer on the offending counsel; re
volvers were whipped out by nine tenths OF the
spectators, and a scene of bloodshed was mar
rowly averted Tried on this remote coast, the
case has attracted comparatively little attention
in the East, considering the elements OF super
stition, perjury and smoldering tragedy which
have marked its progress. Had the proceedings
been had in New York. Boston. Chicago, or any
OF the European capitals the Hill-Sharon suit
would have commanded a degree of attention
surprising that attracted by any trial of modern
times.
At an early hour this morning San Francisco
was the qui vive to gain the first information
Of Judge Sullivans decision in the great Sharon
divorce suit, which has been dragging its slow
length along in the courts for over a year. AT
o'clock the courtroom was filed with crowd of
merchants professional men, and prominent
members OF the bench and bar. Sharon was
conspicuous by his absence. The fair plaintiff
appeared at an early hour, accompanied by her
counsel. Sharon was represented by General
The reading of the decision by Judge Sullivan
consumed two and half hours. The first init
nation that the decision for the plaintiff
brought quick flush to her face and elected
broad smiles from her counsel, the opposing
counsel being proportionately cast down. The
decision began with an exhaustive and compre
hensve review of the case from its inception;
then the court reviewed the marriage contract
and the circumstances under which it is
alleged to have been written. In his opinion
the contract was genuine, and written as Mrs.
Sharon averred. He believed her story in every
particular The fact that date and Nevada APP
peared under the Signature was, in his mind,
proof that it was written and signed by Sharon
as alleged. About the charges that the contract
was crowded progressively, written over
folds and that secret clause was appended to
the letter, he put reliance in, other than as
indications that the contract was written from
dictation in the awkward manner as described
by Mrs Sharon. He doubted the evidence of
the experts to the writing over the folds, and
looked upon the errors and erasures in the con-
tract as proof of its genuineness. The court
then scatchingly denounced the perjury com
mitted by several witnesses for the prosecution.
In the matter Of the alleged introduction of Mrs
Sarah Althea Sharon by Sharon to Mrs. Reigert
and others as his wife, the court believed her
testimony fully false, but after scoring her
for her false testimony, and her attorneys for
using false testimony, said that woman doubt
| full of the legality Of her plea might be tempted
to add to its strength, and still the plea be just
| in other respects
The decision concludes as follows; 81 have
endeavored to trace the lives of the plaintiff and
defendant from the time of their first meeting
to the present. have examined the law bear
ing on their relations, as opened to my investi
CATION and research, and, as result, have
reached the conclusion that William Sharon, de-
| PENDANT by virtue of secret contract of mar
riage, or written consent thereto, and of suffi
Gent assumption of marital rights, duties and
obligations of. the married state to satisfy the
law of the State of California, has become and
now is the husband of Sarah Althea Sharon,
plaintiff in this case. Admissions of pleadings
and explicit testimony in record establish that, in
violation of his marriage VOW he has been
guilty of willfully abandoning his wife, under
| the circumstances amounting to desertion in the
! eyes of the law, and that such wlllful
desertion continued for more than one
year prior to the commencement of this
action. Under the law of this State, Sarah
Althea Sharon. plaintiff in this case, is entitled
| to decree of the court, dssolving the bonds of
marriage now existing between her and her hus-
| band, William Sharon, defendant herein The
| law provides that on its dissolution of marriage,
| the wife, in case of deserton, shall be awarded
| one half the earning or accumulations of the
| parties during their marriage.
mo evidence has been offered to establish
what portion of the property of the defendant is
community property, as distinguished from
rents issues, profits and accumulations of his
! estate, held by him prior TO Aug. %, 1880; the
pleadings do not determine the amount or the
| character of the property which constitute the
acquisitions of the parties as distinct from the
earnings of separate estate of each during the
marriage state, which constitutue community
property. In order to determine that question
it is necessary that an accounting or some
further proceedings should be had. At this
time, announce for the information of the
parties and counsel that the plaintiff u.s. in my
Judgment, entitled to decree of divorce on the
ground of willful desertiSn, and division of the
common property"
The Parties to the Suit.