The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1890-11-28
ALL TIES SEVERED.
Greeley Gets I Divorce on His
Gross Complaint.
HIS WIFE WAS UNTRUE TO HIM.
Their LittIs Girl, the Boas ef Contsn-
tsss 4 Given Late Ne cnstody q
Her Grandparsnts.

sne courts yeeterd0y, but In order to finish
up the Greeley divorce case Judge Lichten-
berg held special session of court for that
purpose. The testimony being all in coun-
eel BEGAN the argument Of the case. Mr..
J. = Aetcalfe represented Mrs. Eta N.
Greeley and Mr.. Carr represented William
Greeley.
Mr.. Mstcalfs's speech Vas very bitter
IN denunciation Of Greeley, whom he stig-
msiised - skulking coward and MUIR
derer, and charged him with cruel and bru-
I'll treatment Of his wife and child. He
said that the little girl, for whose custody
the bitter fight Was waged between the two
parties to the suit. could not understand
the nature Of these proceedings now. but
when she grows 10 womanhood she will
scorn her father for branding her mother
- an aduiteress He said that the father,
IN traducing tho fair mama OF the mother OF
the child. was putting stain upon the
name Of his own daughter, and was not
At person to have the custody of the child
While he was thus speaking the little one
looked 1t her father, who was receiving
such terrible toDgue-lashing, and seemed
trying to comprehend what vas going on
Mr.. Metcalfe put his hand on the
child's golden cufls, and then turning
again to the court, made very earnest ap-
peal for the little one TO be left with her
mother. owing to her tender years and the
fact that she needed . mothers care.
Mr.. Carr began his argument BY rebuking
Mr.. Metcalfs for announcing his client
and pretending 70 believe that the child dis
liked Greeley. He said when he entered the
courtroom the child was sitting on her
fathers lap, lovingly clasped in her fathers
arms, and allowed unmistakable signs OF
affection for him. He said that the law ell
presumed that the husband was most wor.
thy to rear and educate the child, and in
this case that rule should be followed, for
the conduct Of Mrs.. Greeley was such Is to
show her to be unworthy Of the custody Of
the beautiful little girl. He said he was
utterly disgusted with the case. and felt
more than ever disinclined to take another
divorce case; that every one Of them Is
branded with perjury, and people in COM
ing into court Of justice seemed to lose
all regard for the sanctity OF their oaths
and swore 70 the most willful falsehoods.
He referred to William Greeley Is poor,
hardworking but honest man, and scofed
ct the idea of Greeley having shot his wife.
III he did that shooting." said Mr.. Carr.
why has he not been criminally prosecu-
ted for itf It II falsehood. He never
fred that shot. and they know it." He
spoke Of Greeley's devotion to his wife and
child. and said that IL was monstrous that
Mrs. Greeley should ask divorce in order
that she might marry her paramour, to
whom she 10 already engaged, and that it
was harsh commentary on justice for
such . case to be brought into court, and
for such . woman to want to take charge
Of pure little innocent child.
The court then said: This IL an action
on part Of Mrs. Greeley Tor divorce on the
grounds Of cruelty and failuxe to support
The cross-complaint asks for ! divorce on
the grounds Of adultery. Under our code
the court can grant divorces 70 either
party. The divorce laws Of this state are
very liberal. In some ststas. when such
condition Of affairs exist q were shown
in this case, no divorce can be granted to
either party, bus under our laws it can.
There may be defects IA our laws. and
think there are, but that IL matter for the
legislature 70 oct npon.
1.-THE testimony in this case is very con-
Hicting. We have never yet had case of
this character before US but there was this
conflict Of testimony. It Is the duty of the
court to reconcile these conflicting state
Hfuto W0eO 6ucQ t0luk ID possible, or 70
believe so much a. can be corroborated by
other witnesses and circumstances.
"Three letters were introduced as evil
dence in the case that may turn the scale.
One letter in particular is very atfectionate.
and any one reading it could not believe
that the husband to whom it was written
could ever neglect or abuse his wife. An
other letter was written two and half
months later, breathing the same affec-
tionate spirit and is signed Ever your true
and loving wife, These two letters bear
strongly on the case 70 show whether Gree
ley gave al he could to his wife's support
and comfort and was . dntiful husband.
These letters were followed by one written
three months later, after the proceedings
for divorce had been instituted, in which
she wrote this sentence: And now, Willie,
wish to ask favor; please do not tram
pie my name into the dust any more than
your principles of manhood will dictate
Taking these letters and applying them to
the evidence before Us, they turn the scales
so far as the first grounds OF Mrs. Greeley's
complaint (crueity) are concerned. As to
the second ground, the shooting OF Mrs.
Greeley, We cannot be A. clear a. We ought
to be that Greeley committed the act. But
there are many reasons besides the alibi
why he may not have committed the act.
THAT leaves US the counter claim in
which .dnItavv il charved The lau :.