The herald., 1896-02-21
THE DIVORCE MILL
Three Cases Disposed ot-SensationaI AlIega.
cations of Each Complaint

Three Cases Disposed ot-SensationaI AlIega.
cations OF Each Complaint
Three divorce suits were tried i'll the srl-
perior court yesterday; two were heard be-
fore Judge Van Dyke and one before Judge
Mckinley. In every instance the allega-
tions were of sensational character and
iu every instance q decree was promptly
gran ed.
The first case heard by Judge Van Dyke
was that of Charles Fuselehr against
Juanita Fuselehr, and decree was asked
on the ground of adultery. FuseIehr is a
member of the fire department and his du-
ties keep him from home much of the
time. His wife is young and rather good
looking woman, fond of company, and in
her husbands absence her conduct was
anything but what 1t should be. Friends of
FGselehr saw that things were not as he be-
lieved them to be, and they warned the hus-
band that his wife needed looking after.
Fuselehr, who was devoted to his wife, at
first refused to believe that anything was
wrong. His wife was always atIectionate
to him when he was around her,
and he could not believe that the
woman who had sworn to love,
honor and obey him would bring dis
grace upon him and their innocent little
child. Finally the woman became SO bold
llaJ lleT acllOllS CatlSeu d SCdllual III tu6
neighborhood, and again the trusting hus-
Eand was warned. He was put in posses
sion Of facts that could not be disputed,
and he finally secured the assistance of a
friend, Thomas Donahue, to aid him in
finding out the truth. One night when his
wife supposed him to be at his work he put
on substitute and returned 10 his house,
and took up a position where he could COM
rnand full view of the door. He did not
have long to wait before his worst suspi-
cions were confirmed. The man whose at
tentions to Mrs. Fuselehr had caused SO
much scandal was seen to enter the house,
and. after waiting a short time, Fuselenr,
with his witness, followed, and the woman
and her paramour were detected under
circumstances that left no room for doubt
as to their guilt. Fuselehr raised no row,
but left the house. and the following day
instituted suit for divorce. Judge Van
Dyke was satisfied with the proof, and as
the dshonored woman made no defense, a
decree was granted as prayed for, the child
being awarded to the father.
The next case was of an entirely differ-
ent character. a long-suifering wife apply
ing for divorce on the ground of cruelty
and neglect. The title of the case was
Julia A. Cheadle VS.. E. r. Cheadle, and
the plaintiff had no difficulty in convincing
the court of the truth of the allegations OF
her complaint. After giving in detail the
story Of her married life and the abuse and
suffering to which she has been subjected,
the plaintiff said that for months her hus-
band had refused to provide her with the
ordinary necessities, and ON more than one
occasion his conduct had been brutal in
the extreme.
Mrs. Cheadle's story was corroborated
by John Cooper, who keeps restaurant on
Main street, between Third and Fourth.
and with whom Cheadle had been in part
nership. Cooper denounced Cheadle as
scoundrel, and said that he had treated his
wife like brute. He had also tried to in
duce a 17-year-old girl who worked in the
restaurant to elope with him, saying that
he would desert bis wife, draw his money
out of the business and go to some other
place and live. The girl, however, had
sense enough not to listen to his proposals,
and when he had called at her room had
refused to admit him.
AS in the first case, Judge Van Dyke
promptly granted decree as prayed for.
The case tried before Judge Mckinley
was that of Esther Fallon against John j .
Fallon, divorce being asked on the ground
OF extreme cruelty and neglect to provide
Eallon is bricklayer by trade, and when
lie was drinking it was not an unusual oc-
currence Tor him to assault the poor woman,
nlacklng her eyes and otherwise mistreat-
ing her. There was no defense, and the
decree was ordered as prayed for, and SO IS
u month alimony.
Mary I. Schibusch yesterday filed a suit
for divorce against Frank C. Schibusch, on
the ground of cruelty and failure to pro.
vide.