St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1886-08-08

So u AN ~ n AA
0me Interesting Developments in
the UIiman Divorce Proceedings.
An Answer Made.
The suit for divorce brought by Fred
Ullnan against his wife, Emma Ullman,
came up before Judge Simons at special
term of the district court yesterday. The
complaint sets up that the parties were
married at Chicago. in November, 1882, and
in December of the same year moved to
Minneapolis. That in the SUMMER and
fall of 1884 the defendant committed adul-
terry with Arthur Chaplin at divers times
and places. That when the fact came to
his knowledge, in July, 1885. he COM
menced divorce proceedings in the Henne-
pin county court; that the proceedings
were dismissed later in the year on the
promise that she would be true to her mar
rage vows. IN August, 1885. the parties
removed to st. Paul, and Jan. 25 the
plaintiff went to Europe on business trip,
and remained until April 4. On his re-
turn home, so it is alleged in the complaint,
he discovered that his wife had been. in the
habit of visiting house at 452 Minnesota
street, during hSi absence, with one Albert
H. Goodrich. and, it is alleged. committed
adultery with him on several occasions.
1t was supposed by the plaintiff and his
attorney owing to no appearance on the
part of the defendant that divorce would
be granted yesterday: but when the case
was called an attorney, representing the
defendant read to the court lengthy atfl-
davit asking for time to file an answer.
The affidavit alleges that the plaintiff, her
husband is fierce, morOSe and extremely
jealous and that by reason of actions to-
ward her, she has been greatly hurt in
mind and heart. She further states that
on the return of the plaintiff from Europe
he accused her of being in room with
Albert II. Goodnale and with the door
locked on several occasions. She protested
her innocence but was knocked down by
the plaintiff. He finally asked her if she
had any objections to his getting divorce
and she assented. providing it could be
done quietly and without creating any
scandal. In June she went to her
home in Hampton II, Iowa, and
remained there until July II. when she re-
ceived letter from the plaintiff. asking
her to come to Chicago and bid him fare
well. AS he sent money
TO PAY HER FARE,
she went. and during her stay in the city
stopped at the Windsor hotel with the
pldlllLlll. VII HCl dlllfdl lIC lOlu llCl
a decree of divorce had been granted him.
but if she would confess, and tell him the
truth. he would forgive her. She said she
had nothing to confess, and again pro-
tested that she was innocent of the charge
made against her. He thu eatened to kill
her, and by force made her remain in the
came room and bed with him all night.
The reading of the affidavit was sur
prise to the plaintiff and his attorney.
and all the papers in the case were at once
filed with the clerk, UIlman stating that
he had been anxious to keep the matter
quiet for the sake of the defendants repu-
tation, but now he did not care. The
parties and their marital troubles have
been before the public for the last tive
years, Ullman having commenced action
against Thomas S. Quincy, an official in
Chicago, for $4,000 damages several
months ago. claiming that Quincy had
aleniated his wifes affections. The case
was settled. however. The case promise:
10 be an interesting one when tried, az
Ullman claims to have made other dis
eoveries of his wife's unfaithfulness, anc
mentions the names Of a number of promi
.nent professional men who will be called tt
She stand as witnesses.