The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1896-12-09
IT'S NOT WHAT 1T USED TO Be.
THE SUPERIOR DIVORCE BUSINESS
FALLING OFF.

only six Couples Asked For Ferdicts
of Separation Yesterday Where
There Used to he Five Times That
Number-Four Cases Where the
PARTIES Got Only Half 4 Divorce
as they Failed TO show bp For the
second verdict-Contested Divorce
Gases to Come Up Observation-Disclosures
in the Court of Ord
NOrwOod's Charge 70 the City
Court Grand Jury-Bils of Indict-
ment Found.
The divorce business is nbt what itAused
10 be. Every now and hen something
new turns up in which thk effects OF the
stringent times are appirent, and the
divorce business Is one Of he latest
1t used to be, in the god old times. so
much talked about that when man
cot mad with his wife orYloe versa, the
first thing thought Of was divorce, and
dissolving of the unhappy union, all of
which meant money in the pockets of the
LAWYERS, and of the court officials, among
whom are divided the costs. But it is not
co any more. Divorce cases. are COMPARE
lively few and far between, and where it
used to be the case that twenty-five to
fftv couples were made free at each term
of court, now only six or q ght seek bliss
in separation, and many lof those who
think they want a divorce change their
minds before the second verdict is reach
ed. and are never heard from any more.
out of the divorce CASES that came up
on the docket in the superior court yes
terday, four were dismissed, though the
parties. plaintiff and defendant, had al
ready been half way divorced, so to speak,
bv reason of the fact that first verdict
had been granted each of them. 1t always
takes two terms of court in Georgia to get
a divorce. A first verdict is granted at
the first term, and then if the parties
want it, they can get the second verdict
at the next term, but they cannot get a
decree until after the first verdict has
been granted.
The four. cases dismissed from the dock
ct. leaving the parties in a state of half
way divorce were those of Celia Bacon VS..
Scott Bacon, Clarice Bradley VS.. Bryan
Bradley James Jackson VS.. Katie jack
son. and Albert Wiley VS.. Mary Wiley. All
of them were granted first verdicts some
time ago, but they did not show up to get
the final verdict, and the signature of the
court which would have broken their
bonds forever. 1t is presumed that they
made up after their little quarrels and are
happy again in each others love.
There were several cases on the docket
however, in which the parties really meant
business. They made a brief showing to
the jury and the foreman signed the YER
dict for their release without retiring to
the jury room to deliberate over the case
There were only two cases in which sec
ond verdicts were granted, those of
II George w. Curtis against Carrie w. Cur
It's and Minnie Murchison against James
Murchison Judge Falligant signed de-
i crees granting them absolute separation.
There were only four cases in which first
Verdcts were granted, those of John A.
Long against Julia M. Long, Gertrude R.
Pregnitz against Herman Priegnitz, Jas.
4 0. Young against Fannie Young and Geor-
gia Floyd against Felix Floyd. In nearly
every case before the court the grounds
alleged for the divorce were desertion,
though in one or two of them there We're
allegations of cruel treatment.
The session of the court to-day will also
be devoted to the divorce business, those
cases in which the defendants are MAX
ing a contest against the allegations of the
plaintiffs. There are only few of these
on the docket and the divorce docket
stands in quite a contrast to what it was
two or three years ago, when forty or fifty
couples were usually in constant waiting
n for the untying of their matrimonial
bonds.
Fl Besides divorces yesterday was also
n quite a day for citizens in the superior
court There were just six subjects Of
foreign powers given all the rights of
American citizenship, three of them for
merry Englishmen and three of them, once
Germans. Some one remarked after view
q ing the list and the nationalities that the
Citizens Club and the Liberal Club had
split exactly even on the deal. The for
mer subjects of her majesty the queen
were Robert Henry Cole, Fred H. jenkins
and John Murphy, while Emperor Will
n liams friends were Henry G.. Tholken,
John Behrmann and Diedrich R. Muller.
The city court grand jury convened yes
terday for the November term. 1t took
some time to get eighteen jurors owing to
the fact that of the twenty-five who had
been drawn half a dozen or more were ex-
empt either by reason of over age or by
military exemption. Fifteen were all that
FL eouId be qualified. Three extra Jurors
We're finally summoned and made up the
requisite eighteen. The trouble was that
In making UP the jury list large number
Of names of citizens exempt from jury duty
were put in the box by the jury commits
soners. An unusual number of these were
drawn for the present term. Judge Nor
wood took steps to prevent any further de-
lay by the drawing of sixteen additional
grand jurors, which, with the twenty-five
already drawn, will furnish a complete
Jury.
The jury as organized consisted Of
Messrs. Joseph Phillips, John Reilly, w.
Powell, G. A. Gregory, Abe s. Quicken
nemer, Z. G. Cabaniss, M l.. Byck, T. T..
aapeau. w. S. King, c. r. Woods, John
CGoman, w. H. Connerat George w.
anderson c. G.. Anderson, ]. f. LaFar,
p J. Kennedy and James McGrath.
Judge Norwood's charge was an able
One. After referring to such matters
as the law prescribes shall be included In
he charge, Judge Norwood took up the
laws against gambling, selling liquor to
minors and drunlords, keeping opening
uppiing houses on the Sabbath, carrying
concealed weapons and the need for a
eiormatory for youthful criminals. On
he subject OF gambling he said: Keno,
gker faro, selling lottery tickets and