Semi-weekly register. (Brookings, Brookings Co., S.D.) 1894-1898, 1895-01-05
The Hart Divorce Case.

case Is remarkable one in many
ways. Mr.. Hart sought his freedom
on three grounds-desertiOn, cruelty
and drunkenness. The wife made
very determined and vindictive oppo-
stion, represented by able lawyers
both in New York and South Dakota.
Nevertheless, the husband, repre-
sented by Cheever & Hall, made a
very strong and conclusive showing.
The desertion of her husbands home
was not denied by the defendant, who
pleaded justification and pointed to a
decree Of separation granted to her by
a New York court. But in regard to
this decree it was shown by the hus-
band-and not denied by the defend
ant-that he virtually permitted her
to obtain this separation, hoping, that
if he permitted her to live apart from
him, with the two children, and paid
the alimony ordered by the court,
that she would not molest him and
permit him to attend to his business
in peace. This agreement she did not
keep, however, and Immediately be-
gan a systematic persecution of her
husband, which ended in depriving
him Of his means of livelihood and
driving him away from New York,
where she seems to have harassed him
to an extent that finally became un-
endurable.
AS to the allegations of cruelty it
was shown by the evidence that the
wife attempted her husbands life on
five occasions, twice by attempting to
shoot him and three times by attack
ing him with other weapons. Besides
these there were other assaults upon
him shown. But the worst acts of
cruelty, in the husbands opinion, were
his wifes systematic training Of the
two children to dislike the father, by
repeating to them, day after day,
stories of the alleged misdeeds on his
part which the wife entirely failed to
substantiate at the trial. The wife
denied, in her evidence, that she had
poisoned the minds of the children
against the father, but on the hus-
bands behalf there were six witnesses
who testified that they had heard Mrs.
Hart denOuncing the father to the
children, and her own evidence showed
| that she tried to influence the young
daughter against the father by TAX
ing her to play the spy upon the faith
er when he called upon some lady
friends of the family, an occasion upon
which, as the wife tried to make 1t
appear, the father had conducted him.
self improperly. But her evidence
entirely failed to show that any i'm
proper act was committed. Mrs. Hart
and her lawyers fought with bitter
ness to make the husbands visits to
these ladies tell against him, because
of the late hour at which he remained
during these visits. But on the other
hand, it was shown that there were six
or eight other persons present while
Mr.. Hart was at this house, among
others a clergyman, land that the social
gatherings in question took place in
the family sitting-room. Further
more, it appeared that Mr.. Hart and
his friends knew Mrs. Hart was play
ing the spy upon him, by watching
| from the other side of the street, and
he purposely prolonged his stay from
natural, but perhaps indiscreet, de-
sire to punish the wife for her un-
founded jealousy.
The charge of habitual over-indulg-
ence in liquor by the defendant was
conclusively proven by the evidence
of six witnesses. The testimony of
one OF these-Anna Parker, a colored
chamber-maid-who had many times
seen Mrs. Hart under the influence Of
drink-was unanswerable. This girl
had not only seen Mrs. Hart drink
whiskey, but had herself been pre-
vailed upon by Mrs. Hart to indulge.
The great secret of all the domestic
trouble in the Hart household was
undoubtedly, as the evidence shows,
the violent temper of the wife and her
unfounded jealousy of her husband.
This jealousy seems to have amounted
to a mono-mana-the wife really
seems to have been insane on the
subject. Her husbands employment
on a prominent New York news
| naner kent, him ont until a very late