The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1896-12-30


of the Parties, and They are Now Rssur.
rec.ed to Cause Troublesome People
Will Find Themselves Bisamists when
They Glance over the List-Many Peo-
pIe Separated without Leaving Any
Record of the Event-List of Cases.
When a person picks up the docket for
the January term Of the district court
and looks over its pages he finds it nee
essery 10 lcok at the pages again in or
der to assure himself that it is not an
Oklahoma or North Dakota docket. 1t
is adorned from cover to cover with di-
vorce cases. 1t is doubtful whether any
Oklahoma docket ever did compare with
it so far as the percentage Of divorce
cases 10 other cases is concerned.
There will be merry times this coming
term OF the district court over these
cases. Judge Dale never gets demon
strative over anything in the judicial
line, hut he can hardly conceal the fact
that he is on the war path now. Both
lawyers and litigants will have a great
deal to explain when some OF these cases
are called and it is not improbable that
after explanations trouble may follow
that will enlbarrass some people who
want the world to believe that they are
husband and wife. The fact is that %
per cent of the people involved in these
cases are married TO other people, either
not knowing or not caring that they are
living in one Of the highest crimes
known to the law-bigamy.
Marriage ought TO be one Of the most
serious events in Christian life, but the
dockets of the district court shows that
a great many people do not estimate its
Importance very highly. Nine out Of
every ten persons who have their grieV-
anceS aired in a court think that because
the judge exposes his opinion that they
ought TO have a divorce, leave the court
room, and if they are not already en-
gagged TO marry another person they look
for wife or a husband, as the case may
be, before they are at the foot OF the
steps They do not care a straw ap-
parently, or are very ignorant, whether
the divorce is completed or not. A di-
vorce case is never completed until II Is
made a matter Of record in the books OF
the clerk and il is not made a matter of
record until the expenses of filing the
decree are paid or in some other man
ner satisfied. Some day, when the par
ties are again married. somebody viii
have them arrested for bigamy and there
will be no records TO prove their limo
cence. Then, in time 10 come. there may
be occasion to prove the legitimacy OF
their wedlock or their children, and the
records will be silent. It is very serl-
Gus matter. When these cases are called
I'D before Judge Dale if a proper show
ing is not made TO him he will dismiss
the cases and that act will nulify all
previous action except the original mar
rage which will still stand and cause
somebody trouble.
The following is a complete list of the
cases in the docket for the January term:
Sarah T. eager VS.. Merlin Z. eager.
Robert L. Golding VS.. Minnie Gold
ing
Amelia Skillman vs.. William r. Skill
man.
Susan Jilts vs. William Jilts.
Lucy Olive Miller VS.. Joseph f. Miller.
Peter Jason VS.. Catherine Jason.
Allie Cornwell vs.. c. p. Cornwell.
Hannah Priest VS.. James L. Priest.
Eta Moore VS.. Halle Moore
Zelma Malone vs.. Thomas II. Malone.
Ida F Dean VS.. Ralph Dean.
Belle Redmond vs.. Hiram Reckmond.
Shade Whitfield VS.. Mary Whitfield.
Ada F. Pratt vs. Frank c. Pratt.
Mary NJ Fisher vs.. James w Fisher.
Belle Pechin vs.. Harry Pechin.
Eta J. De Witt VS.. Wesley De Witt
Richard II. Dimes VS.. Mary Dimes.
Arna DorCas Quinland VS.. William b
ouinland.
Annie Rossler vs.. John c. Rossler-
William Nj. Knox vs.. Laura J. Knox.
Jennie NJ. Hays vs.. Frank r. Hays
Rufus W Under VS.. Margaret a. Lin
Der.
W. c.. Dood KS Mary L. Dodd.
frankie Kerbaugh VS.. A. B. Ker-
bauCh.
Annie Omen vs.. Alfred J. Omen.
Mary z. Lynch VS.. John Lynch.
Margaret 4. Crow VS.. Albert Crow.
Sarah Leonard VS.. William Leonard.
Maggie Burdick VS.. Joseph Burdick.
Sarah C. Fash VS.. James NJ. Fash.
Lavmia Plymouth VS.. Oscar Plymouth.
Elsie Regier VS.. Robert Regier.
Mary Ann Newell Tvs. Nelson Newell.
Abby j. Addy VS.. John W. Addy.
Ellen c. Fisher VS.. Charles W. Fisher.
Mary Brisgle vs.. George Briggle.
Alice l. Powell vs.. Felix L. Powell.
Carrie Nj Gray vs.. Arthur II. Gray.
Anna Miller vs. Samuel Miller
A c. 5. Simonson vs.. Caroline Simon
son.
Fannie f. McCracken vs.. John Nc
Cracker.
Emma Frances Dadisman VS.. Isaac
Hill Dadisman.
Ellen f. Adams vs. F. ]. Adams.
Constance T. Stewart VS.. Jesse N.
Stewart.
Ella McKenna VS. James McKenna.
Fla Gaffney VS. John Gaffney.
Jennie Murphy vs.. Daniel Murphy.
Rachel Goodwin vs.. Wesley r. Good
win
Matte Z. Curry VS. Nathaniel D. Cur
~.
Archie Payne vs. Alice Payne.
Olive VI. Benjamin vs.. Silas 3. Ben
jamiu.
Sabine E. Grinden vs.. Ellen NJ. Grin
dell.
1. W. Hammond vs.. ]. E. Hammond
Louie Ballard vs.. f. L. Ballard.
Emma c. Hammack VS.. Charles T.
Hammock.
Dolly Ortiz vs. Herbert Ortiz.
Fannie McCracken vs.. John McCrack
en-.
Ida futile vs. William t Tuttle.
Emily NJ Morris Us. William /. Nor
lis
Robert Noting vs.. Josie Noting.
Pearl Dewey VS. Perrin Dewey
q. A Fletcher vs.. Laura Fletcher.
John II. Byers vs.. Minnie Byers.
Susie Smith VS. Charles Smith.
Della Aaron vs. solomon Aaron.
Allie HauS VS.. Charles Haus.
Jeffie TaIbart .vS. Jacob -Talbart.
Mahala J.Diffenderfer VS.. Samuel J.
D;ffenderfer.
Eliza J. Sampson vs. John G. SamD-
son.
Louis Ballard vs. Scott Ballard
Walter Graves VS.. Myrtle E Graves.