National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1884-05-28
WOES OF THE MARRIED,
Mrs. Karcher's Half Sister Desires a Divorce
From Deserving Husband.
Tho Brutal Behavior OF n War DopSrt-
ment Clerk Toward His wife.

Tho Karcher-Grimes homicide was tho
foundation for one divorce suit and second
has such close connection with il in some
respects as to DO almost identified with it.
Mr.. T. J. Mackoy who was counsel for Louis
Karcher whom on trial, and who last Monday
entered in his behalf bill for divorce from
his wife, Mary Karchor (neo Mitchell). yes.
terday for Theresa Miller filed bill for
divorce from her husband, Edward Miller.
She states that she is a resident of this
district, but that her husband is subject
and resides within tho German empire. Her
maiden namo was Theresa Herfurth, and
they were married in this district by Rev.
Ernest Lohnort, Of tho Lutheran church, on
March IL, 1882 She complains that two
months later no deserted her without cause,
and since that time has contributed nothing
to her support.
Mrs. Miller is half sister of Mrs. Karcher,
AM was witness for the defendant at the
nv trial, testifying TO tho misconduct Of
NJ Narchcr on two or three occasions.
Nhile tho grist comes there is also some
going out, and yesterday Justice Cox disposed
of case in which there were serious charges
aud countorcharges.
On tho Sth of last October Judge G. S.
Bundy, as solicitor for Morris l.. Alderman,
filed petition for divorce from his wife,
Ackerman, nee Hoagland. After reciting the
fact of their marriage at the Church Of tho
Epiphany, by the Rev. Chris. II. Hall, on
Nov. "a, 1867, he says that while he treated
her with kindness and respect, and in every
way supplied her wants, she, on the 10th Of
January, 1888, at No. 400 Now York avenue,
committed adultery with William Ii. Malo-
ney, and on divers other occasions during the
months Of January, February, March, and
April OF tho same year repeated this act of
inhdelity with him.
Four days after the filing of the petition
Mrs. Ackerman, through her attorney, Mr.
III. b. Moulton, put in her reply to the grave
accusation made by her husband, emphati-
cally denying tho truth of the whole state
ment. AT the same time she filed a cross
petition, praying that she might be decrecd
divorce from him and granted alimony.
After stating tho fact of their marriage, tho
birth of o daughter now deceased, and the
| husband being employed in the war depart
ment at tho present time, she complained
| that after their marriage her husband COM
menced a system of cruel treatment of her,
using the most proisne Language, applying to
| her the most disgusting and loath-
some names, and inficting upon her kicks,
cuffs and blows with his boots, fists, and
clubs. So cruel and terrible was his treat
ment that she had to apply to tho public
authorities for protection from his violence,
and he was bound over to keep the peace.
| Upon ono occasion he brought in an ak with
tried to find satisfaction in chopping the
piano to pieces. At times no amused himself
with throwing knives, plates, china, and
glassware, and oven dishes of hot soup
at her. In consequence of this treatment
she left him six times before the
final separation. lntemperance also seems
to havo taken prominent part in
interrupting the happiness of the family, and
twice he was dismissed from position he
held in the interior department. on account
of drunkenness and depravity, once being
restored at her solicitation. Several times
he ordered her out Of the house, and com.
manded that she 20 on tho street and carr
her living, and because she declined so base
proposition she was abused. Among tn,
acts of brutality cited, of which there were
many, is the following: At tho time of thu
birth Of her baby, on Dec. 8, 1860, she say
that her husband was at home drunk, and
that sho had neither nurse nor physician
while her drunken husband was seeking Il
kill her. When she asked for medi
cine or medical aid he told he
to get them and go to hell" Sh
further charged that he committed adultery
with various lowd women, since the discovery
of which she has had nothing to do with him
She says that he owns real estate valued a
$1,000 and is q clerk with q salary of 81 ,20C
per annum.
Mr.. Alderman, in answering, denied tn,
truth of all these charges preferred by hi:
wife, admitting, however, that at certain
times he had been imprudent in his drinking
The testimony taken was read to the chan
cellor last week, and yesterday Justice Cox
ordered decree drawn dismissing the orig
inal petition and granting the wife divorc,
on her cross BILL