The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1896-02-04
IN FIVE DIVORCE CASES
Testimony Heard Before Judge H. n.
Edwards in Chambers.
TALES or MARRIED STRIFE
Variety of Reasons Assigned as Grounds
Why Legal Separations should
10 Grantcd-Dctailso OF the
Testimony Taken.

Judge II. NJ. Edwards was busy in
chambers yesterday afternoon, evil
oence In five divorce proceedings being
heard by him. Attorney NJ. j. Mean
drew was commissioner in all of them,
and he took stenographic notes of the
testimony.
The first hearing was the case of Jen-
ME Chromes against John l.. Chromes,
an eX-member of the Scranton police
force. They We're married on March
26, 1876, and lived together until three
years ago, when Chromes went away
and has not returned to his wife and
home since. She heard he came back
to Scranton since. but he did not call on
her. The last she heard of him was
short while ago. when the information
came that he was i'm the IuZerne coun-
ty prison, for what Offense she could not
state. Attorney John f. Scragg rep
resented the libeliant.
The second case was that of John
Chase against his wife. Emma G.. Chase.
Attorney II. II. Holgate appeared for
Mr.. Chase. They We're married In Iowa
In 1883. Chase came to La Plume. this
county. in 1890, but his wife did not ar
rive until nearly two years later On
July II. 1892. she Informed him that the
country hereaboutS did not suit her and
she left him. Notwithstanding several
efforts to get her back, she refused.
Mrs. Nichols Left Her Home.
Samuel Nichols against Priscilla
Nichols. was the next case. Attorney
Scragg represented the libellant This
couple lived happily together down near
the Sibley along the back road. in Old
Forge township. until two years ago.
The husband did not know what year
he was married to her, but two children
were born. They are now dead, how
ever One evening when he came home
from work, he found her absent. She
was away three days. and investiga-
ton taught him that she had forfeited
all right thereafter to preside over his
household. He refused to condone her
action and she then went to live with
an Italian salOonkeeper named Mike
Ross at the Sibley, whose wife was
dead. She left Ross and took up with
shoemaker named Joe Williams.
Testimony was offered to prove that
she has since been leading a very dissi-
pated life.
Maud Churchill was the next un-
happy person complaining Of married
life. She Is seeking separation from
her husband. william Fritz The libel
liant needs no Introduction to Scranton
folks. She was Il very pretty young
lady and she still retains her beauty.
when she went away with Fritz ana
was married to him in the city hail,
NEW 1bi II Wy Ill ho'N' 'tNS "'''' 49,
the stage and once when they were NIL
ing an engagement in Boston he locked
her in her room three days and three
nights without food. He afterwards
explained that he lost all his money at
the poker table and was in agony over
it. and that he was sorry for locking
her in the room.
Fritz's View of Ma;riInony.
But when they had no engagement
they came to live with her parents in
this city and on several occasions he
choked her. once they caught him
with his hands on her throat and he
told them she was his wife and he had
right to kill her If it pleased him.
His treatment Of her she AYERS had
been very brutal until she was no long
er able to put up with it.
The fifth case was the one in which
Martha Gehling is applying Gor scpara-
ton from her husbandJohn +. Gehling,
to whom she was married nearly 20
years ago. They lived on the West
Side and one evening three years ago
he went out after supper without say
ing a word. She did not mind that,
but when he did not return at the usual
time, she got worried. Locking about
the room she saw IA note lying ON the
table bidding her good-by. No infor-
nation was contained in it stating
where he was going or when he would
be back She has not seen him since.