Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1892-10-24
THIRD DISTRICT COURT,
Tbe Halquist DiVOTCs Case Brings
Some Strange Revelations,
THE BYSoN TROUBLE SETTLED.
A Case Involving the Question Of Orig
inal vs.. Recent city Surveys
sundry Legal Affairs.

the first matter ~ occupy the attention
OF Chief Justice Zane In tue Third
district court this morning.
The case was that Of Anna Catherine
Malquist VIZ. John Malquisl, suit for
divorce on the ground Of adultery and
failure to provide.
The plaintiff was represented by
Attorney Ogden Hiles and the defends
ant by Attorney $. w. Darke.
The statement Of the petitioner was
to the effect that the marriage took
place In June, 1870, In Copen.
hagen, Denmark. The defendant Is
by trade n blacksmith. They came to
this country ia the year 1871; and tho
petitioner alleges that for the last
thirteen years defendant has not con.
ttibuied any thing whatever to her sup.
port. Besides praying for allmony Quo
amount, however, being namely, she
asked that the defendant be restricted
from disposing OF his property, tho
value Of which she declares to DO over
$4,000
Attorney Darke, in opposing the
motion, read from an affidavit made
10y the defendant, who was present ia
court Malquist swore that ho and the
plaintiff were never married, but sim
ply lived together In Copenhagen rs
"mau and mistrrss.n When they came
10 America the same relation wa con.
tinuod, urtil June, 1879, when the
cOhabitatiOn ceased by mutual CON
sent. Defendant then equally divided
what he possessed betweeh hnuself
AMI the petitioner, aud she returned 10
Sweden with her illegitlmate dnugh.
ter. From that tine until these
divorce proceedings were instituted
quite recently, he says, Ice had heard
nothing whatever OF the woman.
| Malqulsi also omphatically denied
that he vas the owner OF considerable
property; on the contrary, that no had
nothing but what he worried Tor, aui
hts earnings did not average, the year
round, more than s55 per month.
Attorney Darku having asked that
| the motto bee diHmissed.
Judge Zauc ni1 shat " course
| tho final allowance VI alimouy
! Of at all would DO determined
on the hearing Of the case.
For the present the court would allow
the plaintiff $50 por mUnth az alimony,
| 500 attorneys fees, Atiu SO count costs.
Attorney DATha thon asked the
| Judge 70 set the case Tor trial Ou IA
early Jay, anu suggested next Sslur-
Jay, but his Honor said II must come
on In regular order.
a DIVORCE SUIT AauCAnLY SETTLED.
On the application OF Attorney
Frank Pierce, who appeared for the
plaintiff, the divorce suit " Phoebe
Eleanor Bynon va. William n. BynOn
was cNpungrd from the cause list, the
matter having been settled out Of
court. The deiendRut was formerly
deputy marshal under y. ). Marshal
Patsons.
DIsufssED
The case Of Lars Jensen We. Charles
Gilmore was dismissed on motion Of
Attorney Barlow Ferguson Tor the
plaintiff.
JUDGMENT By STIPULATION.
In the suit Of James II. Smith W.
Frederick Morris, the answer waa
withdrawn and judgment, By siipula.
ton filed, entered for the plaintiff !or
sl,0il,7l.
LAND SURVEY DISCREPANCIES.
The case OF Adam Duncan vs w. II.
n. SpnDord and Elmer Spaaord, next
taken up by tue court, was one involv.
ing the question OF original surveya VI.
recent city surveys where disctepau-
cies appear between them.
The faotsshowed that Mr.. Duncan
has been the owner OF lot block 10
plat "B" for over thirty years. The
lines were officially surveyed as
early M 1873, at which time those that
had already been long marked upon
the ground by stakes, Irrigation bitches
and fences were found IN DO correct.
In April, 1891. Mr.. Spafford, having
purchased nm adjoining lot, had a new
survey made by the city surveyor, and
proceeded to erect u two and hall feet
dwelling over the old line, on 10 Mr..
Duncan's. He was notified by Duncan
that he himself claimed these two and
halt feet, but SpAflord replied that he
had placed his house according to the
city survey which he had had run
for the purpose OF Bscertaining The
ilHti anu NlAAt ~. hAs DhhCtn NAhttl
the land II would cost him lawsuit.
The present action was brought by
Mr.. Duncan 10 ejec, the defendant
/ from the p feet, also 10 recover $1,000
as damages.
The plaintiff was represented by
Judge Henderson,; Attorney Baldwin
was the defendants counsel.
Evidence was taken on both sides
and the case submitted to the court,
jury having been waived.
GRAND JURY IN SESSION.
The grand jury met again this morn.
ing, after weeks recess, and took up
criminal cases.
IN srA1U QUO.
The newly.aprOintod mnrshal (Mr.
I. A. Bont0n) tak,s au occasional run
out TO the penltentiary and pays "A
visit now and again 10 retiring Mar.
ehal PnisOns In his office, Just 10 Hce
how things are going on; but beyond
this he has taken no further action to.
wards stepping into the official ahoea Of
Mr. Parsons.
BEFoRE A REFEmE.
The taking Of testimony In the case
Of tho Euteka Mining company Va.
the Bullion Beck ami Champion et al,
was resumed before Referee Merritt
this morning, and NJ 1880 an adjourn
ment wa taken till NoVembr 2nd, Tor
the attendance Of an important wit
ness on that date.