Wheeling Sunday register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1882-1934, 1884-03-30

The SHARoN-HILL litigation in San
Francisco, which, because Of the de-
fendant's great wealth, his position as
an ex-senator Of the United States, and
the exceeding nastiness Of the revela-
tons, has become q cause celebre, still
drags its amusing length along. The
case has been on trial for nearly two
weeks, and the evidence for the prose-
cution Is nearly all in. Miss HILL sues
Mr.. SHARON for divorce and share of
bis property. She does not sllege that
q regular marriage ceremony took
place between them, but produces So
called marriage contract" signed by
Mr.. SHARON, as the basis Of her suit.
SHARON denies the contract, says 1t Is
f rged, and that he never had any re-
IA tiOns with the woman other than
the kind she had been in the habit OF
having with men," In other words, he
admits she had been his mistress; that
during the continuance ofth0se relations
he had provided for her literally. The
public is inclined to accept this version
as true and to regard the woman as a
blackmailer, but the trial has brought
out certain facts which have heightened
public contempt for SHARSN, and, if
there is any way for the jury to do it, it
will no doubt give the woman q round
sum Of money.
SHARON belongs to that class OF rich
men who believe that the possession OF
wealth and liberality in expanding it
atones for any degree OF social depravity.
California is full of milliOnsiFes whose
private lives are disgrace to them.
selves and the community. They prac-
tice their vices openly and repudiate
the idea OF social or personal RESPONSE
bility. They are upheld IN such things
by vicious and subservient sentiment,
and they go on adding TO their vices
and demorslizing the community with
out shame or self reprosch. Such men
are game for the HILL type, and when
one Of her class jumps on a victim OF
the SHARON type with more than
sual force the public is slow with it,
sympathy.
But in the case of SHARON the testi-
mony reveals shamelessnesS on hi
y, 1T that has aroused Indignation and
a readiness TO applaud verdict against
him. 1t shows that he took the HILL
woman to the Palace Hotel, supported
her there in luxurious style, and almost
forced her upon the attentions of his
family and friends. He commanded
his beautiful daughter, who afterward
married Sir THOMAS HESKETH, Of Eng
land, to receive her at their lovely
| country home a. Belmont, and when
| the spirited girl rebelled tod her hOtly
that "NliSs HILL had just as good a
right to go to Belmont as she had"
| He took Miss Hill. to Belmont, kept
her there 8 week and afterward "a e
her carte blanche to go there with her
| own friends, some of whom were shady
enough, and hold nightly revelries.
Worse than all, he took her there to at
tend reception to General GRANT,
and afterward had her at his daughters
wedding, Introducing her to his guests
and parading heA on his arm to the
modification of the bride and her
friends, who were possessed of the
! shameless secret. y man a million
aire and ex- United States Senator
who can act with such indecent disre-
gard of his social and domestic obliga-
tions as to force the society o! his mis-
tress upon his daughter and his own
distinguished guests deserves to be pun
ished heavily where punishment alone
eau reach such man-in his pocket.