Los Angeles daily herald., 1889-04-13
THE FOSTER CASE.
A Wife who Did Not Get a Divorce
from Her Husband.


A very interesting divorce case was
heard in Judge Wade's court yesterday
1t was that of Mrs. S. E. Foster against
H, W. Foster. Both parties to the
action are fast verging to that period OF
life called old age, but they were not
married until June 9th, 1885, when, ac-
cording to Judge Wade, they were GER
tainly old enough to know their own
mind, and to take the consequences of
their own act, however nl-advised it
might have been. Mrs. Foster, in her
complaint, alleged that her husband had
treated her in cruel and inhuman
manner, and especially named time in
December, 1885, when ahe said that
while she was engaged in religious wor-
ship, reading from the Bible and pray
ing, her husband, with intent to prevent
her from conducting family worship at
home, walked about the house slamming
ing the doors. and finally called her
hypocrite, in addition to applying other
epithets too disgusting to be related.
Then, when she was in the midst OF
prayers, he threw water upon her
and swore at her and told her that she
must desist from such devotion and wor-
ship. In September, 1885, she alleged
that, while che was at devotion, he called
her thief, a liar and a hypocrite, coupling
the epithets with oaths, and told her that
he would break up such deviltry. These
scenes she alleged occurred frequently.
In addition to this i'll treatment, she re-
lated in her complaint how he had be-
haved to ladies who called upon her,
aud told how in April, 1886, when Mrs.
Johansen called upon her he said, "What
are you doing about here, you are getting
ready to go to the devil. You belong to
the - 81 oliness Band" In January,
1886, when Mrs. Matilda Haley called,
she alleged that he ordered her off the
premises, and on another occasion, when
Mrs. Haley asked where Mrs. Foster was,
he told her that it was ''none of her -
business" and if he didn't 60 he would
switch her away. The complaint closed
with statement that, on August 5th,
1885, while Mrs. Foster was getting
breakfast, her husband took kettle of
cold water from the stove and threw it in
her face. Then he seized kettle of hot
water and threw it on her, scalding her
left arm.
Tie case came onfor trial and yesterday
morning Mrs. Eo5ter ana several WIZ
nesses testified in relation to the acts OF
Mr.. Foster. Mrs. Fosters allegations
about the scalding was not corroborated,
although the physician who dressed the
burn testified that it was there. A young
| lady who was in the house at the time
had seen the burned arm, but was not
told that Mr.. Foster had thrown the
water. Other testimony was given in
relation to the quarrels between the two,
and at the close of the plaintiffs case.
counsel tor the defendant moved that the
case be dismissed on the ground that nc
extreme cruelty had been shown. Judge
Wade in granting the motion, held that
the testimony as to the actual injuries
was not corroborated, and that while, if
the parties to the suit had been young
and had had little experience in the
world, there might have been cause for
a divorce, yet under the circumstances
and considering the age of both parties,
he did not think there was sufficient
cause. They were old enough to know
their minds and would have to take the
consequences. The case vas dismissed