Daily inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1881-1901, 1899-02-09
THE WESTLAKE TROUBLE

'AAN ]hiiiieb Gil pClllS dlIto III
Judge Clancy's court. It is an action
for divorce and the division of property
valued at about Sc, 200. Mr.. Westlake is
the plaintiff. In about 999 divorce suits
out Of LOCO the judge hears the proofs
and decides, but in this case a jury of ~
men will do the deciding. They are as
Follows: John S. Clapp, Charles H. James,
Ihomas j. knucky, A. j. Wicks, Dennis
M. Smith, Dennis Sullivan, Peter McCabe
George Dewey, Edward Ward, Michael
Jennings, w. *. Packer and John Oswald.
The matter was taken up at 1:30 o'clock
yesterday, but it was close to 8 o'clock
before the jury was secured.
The testimony so far adduced shows
that Mr.. and Mrs. Westlake have been
married to each other three times and
divorced twice. In each of the suits the
husband was the defendant and the de-
crees were obtained on the ground of al
legged cruelty. 1t has also been developed
that the couple lived together as man and
wife under the common law marriage
contract.
Edward Westlake was the only witness
examined during the afternoon. He tes-
titled that Mrs. Westlake and himself
were first united in marriage in 1881, and
, during their married life they had ac-
cumulated much property. Among the
possessions were four lots in block IS of
Leggat & Fosters addition. On these
lOlS llSHl u d : IL
had also acquired title to the Bismarck
lode claim at Meaderville. In September
of 1897 Mrs. Westlake had called him vile
names and told him to leave the house.
Believing that he could not get along
with her he had left and remained away
two months. When he returned he found
! Mrs. Westlake under the influence Of
! liquor, she having consumed a pint of
| whisky. She had, he said, called him vile
| names and attempted to carve him with
a knife. She requested him to fight, but
he declined and knocked the knife from
her grasp. She then called for ponce
protection. During January of 1898 he had
more trouble with her, he added, and de-
cided to quit her. Since then he had been
working in mines and smelters. A year
or so after their marriage he had gone to
the Occur d'Alene country and with
others earned some money teamlng. dlS
share amounted to about $4,000. This
money he had sent to his wife IN TINS Guy
and with it the property now in contro-
versy had been purchased.
Westlake also said he had discovered
q, mine and worked it at a profit. Inc
money had gone into the hands OF ms
wife. She had showed him $1,000 Whlch
she said she had received from the prop
ertv. The real estate had been mort
ragged to raise money with which to work
the Bismarck mine at Meaderville. Inc
money had been spent without returns. !
IT had a few hundred dollars when l
was married. said Westlake.
Then why did you allow your VIE 10
buv a suit of clothing in which to get
,arried? asked one of Mrs. Westlake's
attorneys.
Westlake. She bought it for the French
man."
"What Frenchman?'
His name is Genereaux.'
Don't you know that he has money!
IT do not"
Westlake said the first marriage and
divorce between his wife and himself had
occurred in October of 1881.
1--WE had been living together so long,
said he, chat she thought she ought to
have a divorce in order to establish the
fact that we were married. 1t was an
agreement between us. and when she ap-
piled for a decree I made no appearance.
Seven days later we were married in real
legal form"
When the second decree was issued in
1884 you did not ask for a portion of the
property?'
II did not have a chance said he.
Asked if he had told his wife on one
occasion that if she did not give him half
the property he would kill her, Westlake
answered no..
Westlake said he was SO years old.
Mrs. Thomas c. Hamm testified that
she knew both of the parties to the ac-
ton. On one occasion she had seen
Westlake give his wife $500. The trans
action had taken place in her daughters
kitchen and Mrs. Westlake had acknowl-
edged the gift with the EXPLANATIONS:
God bless you; I'll gle you a kiss
At that time Mrs. Westlake was building
some houses and the money was to be
applied in the payment of their construc-
ton. After the trouble between West
lake. and his wife broke out Mrs. West
lake had shown witness 81 ,4o0.
A fpr [,,1y ! Toe | a. tho CHI. no
Westlakc in Idaho in 1891. His wife was
there about six months, and when she re-
turned to Butte she had let a contract
for the construction of the houses in con-
troversy. Witness had seen Westlakc
give his wife money several times. She
had seen Mrs. Westlake exhibit 1.400 and
heard her say it was not all she had.
As to Westlake, he was a sober, hard
working man.
On cross-eXamination Mrs. Knowles
said she was the daughter of Mrs. Hamm
and a second cousin of Westlake.
George W. Andrews said he had known
the Westlakes about IS years, but when
asked if he was familiar with the repu-
tation of Westlake for truth and v~eracity
in the community in which he resided an
objection was made and sustained.
Mrs. Westlake made a general dsnial of
the allegations of her husband. but ad-
mitted hat at one time her husband had
given her 500 or $500. She had, she al
legged, maintained herself for several
years by keeping boarders and dodgers.
She further stated that at the time she
was married to Westlake in 1887 she had
property and he had lone. She said she
first met Westlake in England in 1869 and
lived with him there a year. Then they
went to Canada and lived there six years.
Were you ever married prior to the