St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1888-06-10
The Records Beaten in the
Number of Cases Looming
Up Yesterday.
Seventeen Pairs Of Unhappy
Welded Ones Ask the
Court for Release.
Eight Nuptial Bonds Broken
by the Court at One
Fell Swoop.
Brutal and Drunken HuS'
bands Show Up in Most
of These Cases.

VI 11GSG OdSGSs
The special calendar for yesterday
contained the largest number of divorce
cases of any calendar in the history of
Hennepin county. The first one was
the case of James E. Waddell VS.. Min
ME E. Waddell. The plaintiff, a red
haired young man of not very prepos-
sessing appearance, stated that he was
twenty-nine years old, and that
the defendant was twenty-six
years old, that they were
married at. BarabOO, Wis.,, on the 14th
of March, 1884, and that they lived to-
gether until February, 1886, when he
left her and their only child with her
parents and came to Minnesota, where
was reliably informed that during his
absence she had married man named
Donaldson, and was at present living
with him in Dakota. The divorce was
granted.
Mary Hanell, a middle-aged woman,
who looked as though she had seen con-
siderable trouble, was the next appli-
cant. She stated that her husband kept
a saloon in the north part OF the city,
and he compelled both her and their
Oldest daughter. aged thirteen years, to
attend bar in the saloon; that they we're
often insulted by the men who fire.
quented the place, and on several oc-
caSionS, when her husband was intoXi-
Gated, he had beaten her and
called her vile names. In October
1884, he knocked her down and dragged
her across the room by her hair. She
gave her age as thirty-nine years and
the defendants as fifty years, and
stated that they were married in this
city on the 10th of December, 1872, and
that the issue of the marriage was five
children, whose ages were thirteen,
eleven, nine, seven and five years re-
spectively. The divorce was granted
and the plaintiff given the care and Gus
tody of the children.
Alice A. FrederickS, a cOmely young
brunette, stated that she was married to
Edward j. Fredericks at Aurora. ILL.,, on
the LIST of May, 1884, and that immedi-
ately after their marriage they left for
Brainerd. Mimi, where her husband
was employed in the Northern Pacific
shops as a machinist. Four days after
their arrival he went on a drunken
spree lasting three days, and a couple
of weeks later he went on another and
was consequently discharged from
his position at the shops. He then took
her watch and chain and pawned them,
and leaving her at the hotel, where they
were boarding, went to Chicago. She
then came to Minneapolis and found
employment. and has supported herself
ever since and has several times SEM
him money. The divorce was granted.
Mary Hill, a blonde young woman of
a careworn appearance, stated that she
was married at Centerville, To-, Oct.
II, 1878, to Benjamin j. Hill. and soon
after their marriage moved to Fargo,
Oak. She gave her age as thirty-three
years and the defendants as fifty years,
and stated that the issue of their
marriage was two children, aged
ten and twelve years respectively.
She said while living at Fargo
her husband commenced drinking,
and while under the influence of liquor
he had often beaten her, both with his
fists and pieces of stove wood, and in
June, 1882. he attacked her with a
razor and drove her out of the house and
threatened to cut her throat. She be-
ing in fear of her life, remained
out of doors all night, and next morn
ing after the defendant had left the
house she took her two children and
came to Minneapolis, where she
has since resided, supporting both
herself and her children by
her own eXertiOns. About a
month ago he came to her place of resi-
dence and broke in the door and threat
ened her life, and she was forced to
call in the police and have him taken in
custody. She was granted a divorce
and given the custody of the children.
Almina Merrill, a young woman of
girlish appearance, gave her age as
twenty-One and stated that she was
married to William Merrill at Elm Hall,
Mich, in February, 1882, and that she
was compelled to support both herself
and her husband by her own labor, he
refusing to work, except at odd times,
and often taking the money which she
had earned and spending it for drink.
The divorce was granted.
Ole Benson asked for divorce from
Helen Benson on the ground of deser-
ton, and also for an order of the court
giving him the care and custody of his
two children, aged five and eight years
respectively. He gave his age as thirty
seven years and the defendants age as
thirty-five years, and stated that
they were married in this city on the
oath of December, 1878, and that his
wife deserted him without cause or prov
ocation. His statements were not cor
robOrated by the evidence, and the
court continued the case so as to give
him chance to secure more evidence.
Viola Risley stated that she was mar
ried to David Risley at Paramount,
Mimi, on the 18th of July, 1880, and gave
her age as twenty-eight years and the
defendants as thirty-siX years, and that
the issue of the marriage was one child,
seven years of age. She said the de-
PENDANT left her in September, 1881,
without cause or prOvOcatiOn, and that
he had contributed nothing to the sup
port of either herself or her child since.
The divorce was granted, giving her the
care and custody of the child.
Lena Ward, who was granted linn
tied divorce from John Ward last Jan
uary. appeared in court yesterday to
ask for her share of the property. She
stated that the defendant owned seven
lots in block 2, COe q Channels addi-
ton, valued at $4,000, which was partly
paid for with her money, and
that he had six policies of
insurance OH his life for $4,000. The
defendant did not put in an appearance.
Judge Young issued an order COMPEL
ing the defendant to pay her $3.50 at
t0rneys' fees and $50 month
alinony. Both of the parties
to this action are prominent MEN,
bers of the Westminster Presbyterian
church, and during the trial fof
divorce, which was allowed on the
ground of cruel and inhuman treat
ment, the court room was crowded
with members of the church, who were
about equally divided in their opinions
between the two litigantS.