The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-01-05
.PLUMLEY DIVORCE CASE
She Lives in Washington, D. c.,
and He in Butte D'y'sse.
A FEW CONTRADICTIONS
The Judge Considers 1t a Mixed Up Al
fair and Won't Pass Upon 1t at
Once-How the Vivian Mat
ter Stands.

The petition of Mary f. Plumley de-
PENDANT in divorce suit brought by c.
Addison Plumley. for an alimony allow
ance, was heard yesterday by Judge
Clancy but it was decided by him that
she did no. make a sufficient showing
to support her petition and she was
granted 80 days in which to prepare to
try it again. Mrs. Plumley is resident
of Washington, d. c., and her husband
resides in Butte. She asked the court
to compel her husband to pay her $50
month, 800 to pay her expenses from
Washington to Butte to attend the trial
and 800 more as attorneys fees. Her
lawyer, j. r. Grice, read to the court
two affidavits to show that she was in
need of the support asked. One affida-
Wit was made by her groceryman in
Washington, who said she owed him a
bill for provisions. Another affidavit
was made by her landlord, who said she
was indebted TO him for rent and could
not pay it. A doctors bin from Wash
ngton physician for $23 for attending a
child of the Plumleys during its sick
ness was also presented to the court
with the statement that the bill was
due in July, 1895, and that Mrs. Plum
ley was unable to pay it. On the other
side Attorney Thresher read an affida-
Wit from Plumley that his wife was a
Washington from which she derived a
big income. and besides that had real
estate and personal property in the city
of Washington. in her own name, worth
$4,000 and capable of earning 1925 a
month. and the possession and benefits
of which are enjoyed exclusively by
her. Plumley also said that he and his
wife jointly owned some real estate in
Salt Lake City, but which brought in no
income, yet his wife, he said, has had
equal access to the property. He also
said his wife had at least $1,000 in cash
on hand. while he was a carpenter by
trade with very little employment at
this time of year and all that he is able
to earn will be required for his own
support. He said that If the court
should order him to pay alimony he
would not be able to obey the order.
Mr.. Thresher also entered an objection
to the sufficiency of the showing made
by Mrs. Plumley she did not repre-
sent that she did not have property
upon which she could make raise. In
view OF the facts. ne said, he could
readily see why she did not make an
affidavit to that fact Mr.. Grice spoke
of the plaintiff. Plumley sneaking from
home and coming to Montana TO "si-
lently and surreptitiously stealing a
divorce" He also said that While Plum
ley was pleading poverty he could take
his lawyer to theaters and drink beer
y.
Judge Clancy said he considerd Mrs.
Plumley's case in bad shape and would
continue the matter until Mr.. Grice
could get some more affidaYits from
her. Mr.. Grice thought the mother and
child might starve in the meantime,
but the court didn't think they would.
The PLAINTIFFS proofs in the divorce
case of Annie Vivian against Thomas
Vivian We're heard by Judge Clancy and
a decree granted the plaintiff. Mrs.
Vivian testified that she was married to
the defendant in Butte on April y. 1884.
and that in February. 1895, he left Butte
to go to Jerome. Arizona. with the in
tention of sending for his family soon.
For five months he sent them nothing,
and did not concern himself as to how
they lived. She wrote to him to come
home, but he replied that he would
never return to Montana, and during
the last Is months she has heard moth
ing OF or from him Two other wit
nesses supported Mrs. Vivians testi-
mony. The decree of divorce gives her
the care and custody of three children.
\ default was entered in the divorce
case of Jennie Nolker against William
Nollier. and the plaintiffs proofs We're
set for hearing to-day.