The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-04-30
A MATRIMONIAL MIDDLE
Brought to Light in the Sweitzer
Estate Matters.
A DIVORCE IS ATTACKED
Both Sweitzer's and Mrs. Carrolrs De-
crees Are Alleged to Be Illegal.
Frank E. Haskins Given
a Decree.

involved in the Sweitzer estate matters,
which were on Judge Lindsay's calen-
dar for hearing yesterday There are
several contesting applicants for the
appointment of administrator of the es-
tate and guardian for two children. On
the 18th of last February Frank
Sweitzer secured a divorce from his
wife, Lizzie Sweitzer, on the ground of
desertion, and Judge Lindsay award
ed him the custody of the two children.
On the same day Kitty Carroll OBJ
tanned divorce in Judge Clancys
court from her husband, Seymour Car
roll also on the ground of desertion.
The same attorney appeared in both
cases and it is understood that Sweitzer
engineered Mrs CAROLS suit as we'll
as his own. A day or two later Sweitzer
ana Mrs. Carroll were married and they
HVed together as husband and wife I'M
I'll about four weeks ago, when he was
killed by an accident in one of the
Montana Ore Purchasing companys
mines. He left a small estate, consist
ing chiefly of 200 insurance some
wages due him and small amount of
personal property Mrs. Carrol-Sweit-
yer petitioned the court for letters of
administration on the estate, and Mrs.
Hannah Lutey, sister of Sweitzer
asked to be appointed guardian of the
children, alleging that their mother had
deserted them. Public Administrator
Collins also filed petition for letters
OF administration at the request of the
original Mrs. Sweitzer, and the latter
petitioned to be appointed guardian of
the children. In her petition she alleged
that both the divorces of her husband
and Mrs. Carroll We're illegal and void
and that the two were never legally
married, although they lived together
as husband and wife after their pre-
tended divorces. The divorces are at
tackled on several grounds. one of which
is that there was no proper service of
summons and another that the decree is
SWeltzerS case is worthless and not
according to law. 1t would appear that
there is good ground for the attack,
for Mrs. CAROLS attorney yesterday
filed motion for leave to amend the
decree and to cure the defects COM
planned of, but the question is whether
the divorce decree of a dead man can
be amended AT the request of one of
the attorneys Judge Lindsay continued
the whole matter for hearing until next
| Saturday. E
A Well-knoWn attorney, familiar with
the case, made the statement yester-
fault divorce cases are absolutely
worthless on account of the careless
ness with which they are drawn and
that many parties who imagine them
selves divorced and have Ifiarriedsagain'
would find themselves in a most pc
culiar and embarrassing position if the
legality Of their divorces should ever be
questioned.
Judge Lindsay yesterday heard the
plaintiffs proof in the divorce case of
Frank E. Haskins against Emily NJ.
Haslins and granted a decree. Ac-
cording to the testimony of the plaintiff
and his father, the former was married
to the defendant at Vancouver in 1855
and moved to Missoula, where they
lived together until August, 1894, when
Haskins came to Butte, but his wife
refused to accompany him. She said
several times that she would come, but
didn't, and in April, 1895, she went to
Portland, where she was living when
Hasl<ins last heard of her. She wrote
to his father about two years ago and
said her husband could get divorce,
as she did not intend to live with him
again.
Judge Clancy granted divorce to the
plaintiff in the case of John Tepsich
against Mary Tepsich on the ground of
desertiOn. The plaintiff testified that
he married the defendant at Glasgow
July l, 1895. and they lived together
until May %, 1897 when she left him.
What kind of a woman was your
wife, asked Judge Clancy.
Il think she is a bad woman" re-
piled Tepsich.
well, don't think; tell me what you
know"
Tepsich then said he knew his wife
was not a good woman, as she had
once been arrested and was convicted
for stealing something. He said he
hadn't seen her in two years.
In the sensational divorce case Of
Lena Ella Herne against Philip Herne
a demurrer to defendants answer was
argued before Judge Lindsay yesterday
afternoon and was by the court over
ruled. Owing to the absence of wit
nesses the hearing of the proofs in the
case of James f. Campbell against
Anna Campbell was continued by Judge
Clancy until next Saturday Several
matters in the Westlake case also went
over until that time for hearing.