The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1897-02-12
WAS NOT DIVORCED.
A. q. Phillips Discovers That the
Decree Was Never Recorded.
He Brings Action, His Wife Makes
Answer, and Another Case Likely.


Phillips & Co., of South Africa, was a
guest at the City Hotel from Nov.
18th last until about New Years, and
then returned to South Africa, by way
of London. He came into prominence
by reason of visit which he paid to
Grant Brambel at Sleepy Eye, and Of
fers which he made to promote the
establishment of companies to pur-
chase the patent rights. An interest
ing story has come out concerning
some of his private affairs, aud some
of the details, obtained from his at
torney, W. r. Geddes, are as follows:
About six years ago, Mr.. and Mrs.
Phillips talked over the matter of a
divorce which he desired to secure. In
order that nothing might be made of
record that might bring the blush of
shame to the cheeks of the three
children, at the request Of the lat
ter, he proposed that she bring action
against him on the ground OF deser-
tion, and this she consented to do.
The action was commenced, and he
supposed that the divorce was granted.
When he came to Mankato last fall TO
visit two of his children, who were
staying with their uncle, Henry Orig
non, al st. Clair, they told him that
the decree of divorce had never been
registered at San Francisco, the place
where the action commenced, and
that therefore it had never been
granted. Mr.. Phillips wrote to a
friend at San Francisco to look the
matter up for him, and in December
received reply. The friend wrote
that the decree had never been filed
but that his wife had, on July End,
1894, married VIM. A. Bradford, who
had within a year afterwards COM
menced an action to divorce her.
Other things Mr.. Phillips also heard
concerning his wife's conduct, which
it is needless to state here.
Mr.. Phillips, on learning that the
divorce which he thought shat
his wife had secured had never been
granted, started an action for divorce
against her, Eva Phillips, and the pa
pers were served on her Jan. End last.
He alleged desertion, naming May
18th, 1891, as the time. He alleged
that there were three children, Lulu
M, aged seventeen years, James r..
aged twenty years, and Galena, aged
sixteen years.
Mrs. Phillips decided to fight this,
and retained San Francisco counsel,
and Hughes Bros. to watch her in
terests in Mankato. She has put in
an answer in which she denies that
she deserted her husband, and denies
that he has been a resident of Mime
sofa for more than six months. For a
further and separate defense the de-
PENDANT AYERS that she and the
plaintiff were married at West Jor-
dan, Utah, Sept. 18th, 1875, she not
being fourteen years old at that time,
while the plaintiff was twenty-seven;
that for more than ten years last past,
the plaintiff has been guilty of wilful
neglect of the defendant and their
daughter, Lulu, and a portion of the
time of the other Chi ldren, and has fail
ed tocontribute the common necessar-
les of life to the defendant, although
well able to do so, compelling her to
live upon her industry as well as the
charity of friends and relatives; that
in 1885, at Butte, Mont, he deserted
the defendant for more than a year;
that he deserted her on several other
occasions, and finally on May 18th,
1891, taking the son with him; that
defendant then moved to San Fran
cisco, in October, 1892, and has since
resided there. In October, 1892, their
daughter, Galena, by consent of the
defendant, was permitted to go
and reside with her uncle,
Henry Grignon, at St. Clair,
Mimi, where she has since resided.
Lulu Phillips has always remained
with the defendant. The defendant
alleges that she has no property and
no means to come to Mankato to de-
fend the suit; that she has suffered
for food and all the pangs of poverty,
whilst defendant, who is a mechani-
cal engineer by profession, has always
had good salary; that plaintiff has
earned fortune amounting to several
billions of dollars, in South Africa,
and is now trying to throw defendant
and their daughter Lulu on the world
without means; that plaintiff has
threatened to cast adrifG the other
children if defendant resists the suit.
The defendant asks the court to adj
vance her money to defray the ex-
penses of herself and daughter to
Minnesota aud to pay for counsel, and
an order compelling the plaintiff to
pay alimony permanently, and for the
custody of the minor children.
MIR. Phillips, when he was in
formed that his wife had been married
to Mr.. Bradford. dropped the action
L. L. L.. 4