Los Angeles herald., 1892-04-21
THE BURNS DIVORCE CASE.
The Defense Produces Findings
of the Nebraska Divorce.
Defendant Burns Tells His Side Of
the Case.
He Met the Plaintiff on q Steamer-He or
Name Was Sarah A. Butler
Extent Of the Liaison-The
Case Continued.


Of Sarah Burns against her husband, ex-
Sheriff J. F. Burns, came up again be-
fore Judge Mckinley of the superior
court yesterday afternoon. Judge Will
son opened up for the defense by reading
the findings of the court in Nebraska in
1886, in which defendant got divorce
from the plaintiff on the grounds of
adultery committed in 1886 with Charles
G. Ellenwood. Mr.. Burns was then
placed on the stand and testified: "I
was married on August 8, 1889, to Mrs.
Josephine Hill, in Los Angeles. Am now
living with my wife on West Seventeenth
street, and have a son IA months old.
Met the plaintiffsin 1869, between here
and San Francisco on a steamer. When
we arrived in Frisco we went to the
Russ house, and we occupied the same
room for three days and three nights.
She was then Mrs. Sarah A. Butler.
next met her in 1871, when she had
rooms in the United States hotel in Los
Angeles. visited her, paid her board
and room rent for twelve months. l
visited her from three to five times a
week and remained there until and 5
O'Clock in the morning. Do not know
that her husband was aware Of this. In
1886 myself and plaintiff resided in
Ainsworth, Nebraska; she lived at the
Burns house; lived there from Octo.
Der 1883 unCil 1885, when l went to
Omaha. l returned there in October
1885, but did not occupy the same room
with plaintiff. ceased to do 80 after
going to Omaha. l told her on October
A 7 10 tn. &c. \
vorce for cohabiting with Charles c..
her bed from sickness at that time, and
she was perfectly aware that l had in
stituted divorce proceedings against her.
1 next met her in December 1887, at
Colfax, California. We went to lodg.
ing house at Third and Market streets,
San Francisco. A paper was signed
there it was will; it was originally
drawn in Nebraska and I changed
it in San Francisco. No other
papers were drawn and signed by
me at that time. No marriage contract
was signed at that time between me and
the plaintiff. never drew an agree
ment of marriage or signed such paper
with the plaintiff. l returned to Los
Angeles after that visit, and met her in
January, 1887, in Nevada City. We did
not occupy the same room on that occa-
sion. / met her here next, on the street
in Los Angeles, and she said she wanted
to see me. | saw her at the johnson
mansion. l went there to play poker at
intervals, and was then living on New
High street. She went to San Francisco,
and when she came back in September,
1887, we went to the Ramona and lived
there for three months, and then went to
live at a private house and stayed there
until March, 1888. She then left for
San Francisco and I did not live with
her after that time. In June, 1888, she
came to me for money for living with
her, and gave her $500 and took her re-
ceipt. This money was to settle every
thing between us.
The receipt is as follows:
Los ANGELES, June 25, 1888.
Received from j. F. Burns, Esq, the
sum of $500, current funds, in full of all
demands, claims and promises of what
ever nature to date.
MRS. s. A. BURNS.
Witness: w. E. MoRFoRD, JR.
In October, 1883, drew up lease for
her for a lodging house on Los Angeles
street. She remained there about q
year and called there occasionally. At
one time she asked me to get her mar
riage certificate to show her mother and
sister. 1 bought blank marriage GER
tificate and filled it out and gave it to
her. When she got money from me the
agreement was that we should destroy
all letters and papers between US, and
that she should then live with me as my
mistress. never asked Mamie Hargett
to call on my wife at Ramona. 1 never
referred to plaintiff as my wife after
October. 1886. I introduced her as Mrs.
Burns or my former wife. I borrowed
$500 from plaintiff in September. 1887,
and paid it in check. I borrowed
5000 in 1885 from plaintiff and repaid it.
destroyed the answers which she
wrote to my letters, pursuant to the
agreement which we had made. When
she introduced me to other parties she
introduced me as Mr.. Burns. She did
not say that was her husband. When
I introduced her to any one I used the
term Mrs. Burns. Mr.. Mesmer came to
me and said he wanted me to settle with
plaintiff. He said: Crank, 1 want
you to run for sheriff and we will have
800 Germans back of you, and we don't
want any scandal" He said he was a
WlCne6S IN Cn0 case, ana ne ana Mr..
Spence wanted it settled. 1 told him
that it could not be settled.
On cross-examination Burns testified
that the doctor in Nebraska told him he
had quit attending plaintiff after she
got over scarlatina, as she was drunk. 1
was away at the time. I paid Mrs.
Leonard for attending her. My mind
was in a very troubled state at that
time; in fact, was deranged. 1 was
informed by other parties that I was
out of my mind. 'swore to that state
ment. never felt fully relieved until I
dictated letter to her to send to her
paramour. did not mean all said in
my letters. made over my insurance
policy to defeat her paramour. 1 never
deceived anyone regarding our relations.
| did not say anything about having
been divorced from plaintiff when I
visited her mother; that is, 1 did not
tell her mother we were divorced.
The case was continued until this
morning.
The Collapse Of . Rotten Tenement,
With crumbling foundation and shaky, bullying
walls Is not more certainly to be looked for
than the sudden giving Wav of a conctitutinn