The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-06-04
THE CORDES LITIGATION
FORMER WIFE OF THE DEFENDANT
DEMANDS $4,000.
This Is the Fourteenth Suit Filed i'm a
Few short Years - Other
Cases in the Courts.

A departure was made in the chain of liti-
cation that has been on in the county
courts for several years in which Herman
Cordes and his wife, Augusta Cordes. were
either defendant or plaintiff. yesterday, by
the filing of a $4,000 damage suit by Mrs.
Cordes against her former husband. Here
tofore, all the suits filed, which number
fourteen, were divorce suits instituted
either by husband or wife, in which Two
DEGREES were granted. one denied and the
others dismissed before trial. A few months
ago Cordes filed a suit against his wife for
divorce and dismissed it. only TO refile it
last month. This time Mrs. Cordes made no
defense and it is said that within a week
after the decree was granted Cordes mar
ried woman by the name of Shilling. This
has put a bar to all future divorce suits,
far as Cordes and his former wife are
concerned, and the suit yesterday brings
up the old charges of cruel treatment in d
new phase.
Mr.. and Mrs. Cordes were married in 1870
and the first decree of divorce was granted
in 1896. She AYERS in her damage suit that
during their married life she worked hard,
was economical, often worked in the field
and in her husbands brickyard to assist
him, besides looking after her household
duties and taking care of thirteen children,
ten of whom are now living. She says that
during that time she spent very little for
clothing and when she did it for the
cheapest kind. Notwithstanding this she
says her husband, during the past eight
years, has been cruel to her, beaten her,
kicked her, driven her from home, refused
TO allow her to eat at the table and some
times refused to let her have anything to
eat at all. She says that in the year 1896
his treatment became so unbearable that
decree was granted by the Hamilton cOun-
~ court, where the case was taken on
change of venue. In the settlement of this
suit she was given 5000 alimOny. The
complaint here sets out THAT short time
thereafter. the defendant. wickedy contriv-
ing and intending to get said property back,
besought. implored and entreated this
plaintiff to remarry him, making false pro-
testations of repentance for his past con-
duct, asking her forgiveness therefor and
promising that If she would remarry him
he would be to her a kind and loving hus-
band. On the strength of these promises,
she says. she remarked him.
For the purpose of carrying out his
wicked scheme TO get back said property
and to preclude her from ever having any
interest In or to any of his property. he
persuaded her to sign an ante nuptial
contract, relinquishing all her interest and
right in his property. She AYERS that she is
a German ana cannot read and understand
the EngllSn language ana that she did not
know the meaning of the contract. She
says she remarked him for the sake of
their young children. She AYERS that soon
after their marriage her husband preached
the subject of transferring her property
back to him|every day for months and
when she refused he became furious and
threatened to kill her if she did not On the
third day of July, 1899, she alleges that he
assaulted her with a horsewhip and in
flicted such injuries that she is permanently
disab led.
The plaintiff says that last month, when
Cordes filed the last suit for divorce 'well
knowing that he had neither respect nor
love for her and that by reason of his cruel
ty she never could be wife to him or live
In his home again and we'll knowing that
his affections were all centered in another
woman and that he was DESTROYS of marry
ing her she appeared to said action but
made no defense thereto. and the court
awarded him a decree of enforcement and
that in about week from the day of said
decree he did marry said woman whose
name Is Shilling, all to her damage in the
sum of $20,0
second paragraph of the complaint
asks for $4,000 damages for the beating he
is charged with giving her July g. 1899
In the suits flea by Cordes he alleged
that the persistency with which his wife
hled divorce suits had cost him several
thousand dollars