Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1901-11-23
OGDEN NEWS.
------------------. ---.-----.----+
OGDEN. UTAH. NOV 20. 1901
SENSATIONAL DIVORCESUlT
Richard Statewide, Of SlaterwlIe, Prefers Sc
rIOuS Charges Against His Wife.
District Court Cases Suit for Ri gbt OF
Way Board Of Education Votes
For Thanksgiving Holiday,

A sensational divorce suit was filed
In the Second district court by Richard
slater, n well known resident Of Slater
VILE against Sarah Jane Slater, his
Wife, The complaint sets forth that
the plaintiff and defendant were mar
rled at ogden city, May -, 1885, that
there are living Of the issue of their
marriage four children, two boys and
two girls. That since the said mar
Rage the Defendant has treated the
plaintiff In a cruel and inhuman man
ner That about two years prior to
the commencement Of this action the
defendant did cease to love and respect
che plaintiff as her husband and be-
slowed her affections upon one Walter
Clark and received attentions from
him. Some time previous to October
1900 Walter Clark was employed by
the plaintiff to work on his farm at
Statewide Weber county, and Clark
lived at the plaintiffs home, that the
defendant ana said Walter Clark did
secretly and without the plaintiff $
knowledge associate together in an linz
proper manner. That In October, 1900,
the said Clark departed for idaho and
afterwards carried on regular cor
respondence with the defendant That
at the said time the defendant began to
neglect her household duties and dur
ing the fall Of 1900 and spring Of 1901
she abused the plaintiff and up To the
time of filing Of this complaint the de-
PENDANT has used vile epithets and told
him that she hated him. That her
conduct Is becoming more unbearablei
that on August % and "a, of 1901, the
defendant beat the plaintiff with shoes
clothes brushes ETC. wherefore pam
TIT prays for decree OF divorce, TOT
custody Of the four children and Tor
such other relief as the court may
deem equitable.
DISTRICT COURT.
The case Of Rice Creek Irrigation
company vs. MaryWarren was heard pc
fore Judge Rolapp and the following
jury VIM, Raymond. b, Chadwick JT,
Martin Mcfarland, A. j. Heath, X, T.
Harris, John Manning, Il. a, Naisbitt
and Fred Foulger The action Is
brought by the plaintiff TO condemn
certain piece Of land belonging to the
defendant for a right Of way for GER
tain pipe line, that the defendants dam
ages be ascertained and assessed,
The jury after hearing the testimony
for both sides and the arguments by
A. J. Weber for the plaintiff, and Y. d,
Johnson for the defense, adjourned to
the Jury rom and returned with a YER
dict that IL the company build the pro-
posed pipe line over the property that
they pay the defendant SiS5 damages
and SIS for the right Of way.
The case Of the Telluride Power COM
pany against George II. Matson ct al
for condemnlng Of a certain property
for the plaintiffs right of way, was
decided that II the plaintiff file a
bond for s., 400 the property would be
adjudged condemned for said right Of
way.
In the case Of Gorrlnge VS. Read, the
court signed the bill Of exceptions,
BOARD OF EDUCATION.
The board OF education last night
voted for the regular Thanksgiving va
cation for the schools, extending from
Wednesday night to Monday morning.
Miss Virginia Higginbotham resigned
as teacher and the board accepted the
resignation
The finance committee reported the
receipt OF $l0,50O from the county
treasurer. The usual bills were al
lowed and an adjournment was taken
for one week,
OFFICER BURTs HEARING.
The police committee of the city
council, composed Of Jones' Brown and
Cross, held a session last night to hear
evidence I'm regard TO the charges pre-
ferred by Lamont Holmes and Charles
Spaclman against Officer Robert
Burke Holmes testified before the
committee in support of the atildayits
made by himself and Spackman, in
effect that Burke had arrested them
for fast driving on May II last near
Five Points had used vile and abusive
language TO them and had compelled
each one to deposit IS with him as an
alternative of being taken to jail that
this money had later been assessed
against them as fines Burke testified
In his own behalf that he used no vio-
lent language, that he followed the
instructions Of the police court clerk
in accepting money to insure an APP
pearanoe for hearing.
There was a quarrel In the commit
Zee from the first, Brown and Cross
disagreeng with Chirman Jones In
regard to allowing Attorney Leffenger
90 appear In the case for Holmes and
Spackman.
Several wordy disputes took place
and II is probable that Brown and
Cross win submit a majority report
favoring the officer, while Jones may