The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1900-05-22

Hiles yesterday broke the record in
poin of the number of martial disso-
buttons granted. Out of thirty-two
case on the calandar twenty-seven di-
vorces were allowed. two we're referred,
two were continued and one was dis
missed. OF the twenty-seven granted
twenty-three were on the petition of
the wife and six on that Of the husband.
There was a large crowd of spectators,
principals and witnesses in the court
room at the opening of the seAsiOn Of
court, but long before noon the inter-
est Jagged and the audience began to
thin out. This was, Of course, due to
two reasons. that those present had
been granted what they sought. and
the undressing sameness of the tes-
timony which after a dozen or so cases
had been heard. became very monoton-
Gus.
Following IS a list of the cases on
which a decree was granted:
Daisy d. Schaffer VS.. William ].
Schaffer.
CIarissa, E. Symmes vs. George R.
Symmes.
Simeon Scout vs. MAUI CEOLl.
Mary L. Mcleod VS.. Norman w. Nc
Leod.
Louise NJ. Crismon VS.. Sidney c. Girls
mon.
Elizabeth Smith VS.. Hugh W. Smith
Ada De Sercourt VS.. William A De
Scrcourt.
Amy Burnham VS.. Edward T. Burn
ham.
Emily Henrietta Fuller VS.. James
William Fuller
Mary A. Soils VS.. Joseph Soils.
Annie RillstOn VS.. Edwin Rillston.
Bertha Click VS.. Jay Click.
John He'll, jr., VS.. Hattie He'll.
Thela Braun VS.. Peter r. Braun.
Matilda Fagenberg VS.. Adolph Fag-
enberg.
vilate w. G. Taylor vs. William a
Taylor.
Charles C. Anderson VS.. Barbara An
derson.
9Iaggie NJ. Mitchell vs.. Edward ],
Mitchell
Josephine Alcock VS. Samuel AIeock,
Neal J. Anderson VS.. Nettie J. An
derson.
Mary Wiseman VS.. George Wiseman,
Charles Il. Trickett VS.. Alice II.
Trickett.
Margaret Case VS.. Hyrum H. Case.
Addie Hemlow VS. Walter Hemlow.
hAtliAtE ~ May VI. IAElAA 4. May
Irene Crismon VS.. Frank w. Girls
mon.
Edith Dennison VS.. John W. Denni-
son
The suit of Mary E. Jensen against
Lars Jensen was referred to Clerk
Blair and that of Ma garet Webb
against William J. Webb to Clerk Lit
tie. Susie S. DOnelson's case against
her husband, Charles NJ. DOnelsOn, was
H9e,,, F-ca1 nd no Naffin No
Donald VS.. Franklin Mcdonald and
Huel NJ. Alfred VS.. Maud P. Alfred,
were continued for the term.
Many Reasons, for Divorce.
While the reasons for divorces were
leceSsarily largely of the same charac-
ter. desertiOn and non-support, gener-
ally, yet there were all kinds of pain
full If sometimes amusing variations in
the testimony. For instance in the
Mcleod case the wife testified to her
husbands lack of appreciation and
taste in that he wrote her that if she
was not satisfied with him she should
sue for P divorce, and it might be bet
ter for ell concerned if her next choice
belonged to the hod carriers Union.
But then the husband was a news
paper man. Unlike most men of pencil,
ne was addicted to the cup which
cheers and inebriates. And again the
case of Ada De SercoUrt who testified
that when she annexed William a. he
was so tickled that he started in to
celebrate. He has been having a wild
and deliriOus time ever since. In fact
from the condition his wife says he is
in he must have been tickled half to
death Willie has been celebrating up
against the bar for a matter of two
years. but the end has come and now
XViIfic. and Ada are two
In the Schaffer case the wife testified
that she was married on May 26, 1898.
Married bliss was, however, of short
duration for her good man strayed from
home on the 18th of the following Au-
gust and since that time has absented
himself from the bosom Of his family.
He had sought pastures new in the
SunfiOwer state. The last she had heard
OF him he was in Topeka.
Frederick Swanson, step-father to the
plaintiff, testified that his step-sOn- in
law had been discharged from the en-
plOy of the Rio Grande Western rail-
road company for installing himself
for Tom ShaTkey, probably owing 10
the fact that his wife's maiden name
had been Sharkey. 1t followed that
Shaffer must be an able bodied man
and that settled it. Now the wife has
the fighting~name and her liberty Ray
Van Colt acted for the plaintiff
In the Symmes case the plaintiff wife
was allowed $1,000 for the support of
her child and half that amount in year
ly alSmOny.
Scott's Tale of Woe.
The eyes of every woman were riv-
eted on Simeon r. Scott when his case
was called. Scott proved 10 be pleas
ing in the eyes of the other sex and his
testimony was listened to with close
attention. He is a young. good looking
fellow Of IS, and took a draw IN the
matrimonial bag just two years and
one week today. He wishes that he
had drawn a blank.
1t was at first supposed to be a case
of poverty coming in at the Aor and
love chasing itself through the window.
but the looks Of the women in court
which had grown cold warmed up
when Il Yas divulged that Scott was in