The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-02-17
WESTLAKE WANTS HALF
A Suit for Divorce and Division
of Property.
HlSWlFE WAS CRUEL TOHIM
He Says She Assaulted Him With q
Carving Knife and Otherwise Made
Life Burden to Him-But She
Has All the Property

The case of Edward Westlake against
Annie NJ Westlake, suit for divorce
and a division of property. came up be-
fore Judge Clancy yesterday afternoon
on a motion to dissolve a restraining
order issued to prevent the defendant
from disposing of the property, and
for hearing on demurrer to the COM
plant on the ground that two causes
of action were improperly joined.
WestIake asked for a divorce on the
ground of cruelty, alleging shat his wife
had assaulted him with carving
knife and had persistently prosecuted
him and made life q burden for him.
The parties own four lots and eight
frame houses IN the Leggat x Foster
addition valued at $4,000 and bringing
ir rental of $3.50 a month West
lake also said that his wife had $4,000
iii cash and a $500 note drawing per
cent a month interest. All the prop
erty stands in her name, but Westiake
says he is entitled to half of ii and
the defendant was restrained from dis
posing of ii. Robert Mcbride, who
appeared for Mrs. Westlake, argued
that the restraining order was inn
properly issued, as the defendant had
not been given notice and that no bond
had been filed at the time the order
was issued. He also argued that the
action TO declare Mrs. Westlake to be
trustee of IA half interest in the prop
erty was a distinct cause of action and
was improperly Joined With the action
for divorce. He cited a number of au-
thorities to sustain his contention. w.
|. Iippincott, counsel for WeStlake, ar
gued that notice of issuing the restrain
ing order was not necessary, neither
was a bond necessary unless required
~.
munity property, the action in regard
to it, he said, was properly made part
of the action for divorce. After the ar
gu1nents the court oVerruled both mo-
ton and demurrer, and the defendant
was given 10 days in which to answer.
The troubles between the Butte bill
posters are growing. Kendrick, one of
the plaintiffs in the Injunction suit
in court yesterday charging Dair with
a violation of the courts restraining
order and wants him punished for con-
tempt. The order restraining him from
posting bills was served on him on the
18th, and Kendrick says he saw him
the next day putting up bills at the
corner of Broadway and Hamilton
streets An order to show cause why
he should not be punished for contempt
was issued and will be heard on Sat
urday. The injunction matter will be
heard at the same time, having been
continued from yesterday at the re-
quest of j. X. Mcdonald, attorney for
the defendant.
Louise lie Ford yesterday brought
suit for divorce against George c. lie
Ford, to whom she was married at
Butte on the LIST Of May. 1884. The com
plant alleges that ever since Feb. 3,
1896 the plaintiff and her two children
have received no support from the de-
PENDANT. although he is an able bodied
man and well able to provide for them.
Mrs. lie Ford says she is informed
that the defendant has money and
could support his family if he would.
The court is asked to compel him to
pay into court 500 to defray the ex-
penses of the plaintiffs suit. and 500
as counsel fees. and further sum of
$50 as temporary alimony for the sup
port of plaintiff and the two children.
whose custody she also asks to be
awarded.
The contest over the offices of the
school trustees had been set for trial
in Judge Claney's court yesterday. but
the attorneys for the present board
did not have notice of the setting, and
the case went over until the 24th.
S. Safer brought suit against L.
Wottrich yesterday for 500 due on
promissory note executed May p, 1896.