Arizona republican., 1902-04-12

want for q wire: that she had been
 guilty of adultery. which was so open
 and notorious that all Gila Bend knew
 about is except the husband. and when
 he found it out he broke off relations
 with his wife. She lived in Gila Bend
 for some time after that with q man
 named Westbr0ok, is living with him
 now in Tucson and has borne him two
 children. All these facts were testified
 to by the plaintiff, who vas supported
 by three other witnesses and he pro
 duced a letter from his vie in reply
 to one in which he had written her in
 forming her of the divorce proceedings
 against her. In reply she said that as soon as he got ais divorce she was So- ing to make Wesybrook marry her.
 Nothing had been said about the
 charge of desertion. but the bad char acter of the defendant having been esta biished, Judge Kent asked why de
 sertion had been alleged in the com
 plaint; why the defendant had not been charged with adultery. It had
 only been shown. he said that the plaintiff had deserted the woman.
 After that it was brought out that the defendant, after having been caught in wrong doing, had told he,' husband that sine wanted nothing more to do with him and that she could find other men with whom she would rather ! live. This, with the fact Of the woman s bad reputation, was construed into de sertion. That is common charge in divorce complaints when the plaintiff wants to conceal the real grievance for the purpose of making the case less sensational. Martin said that he
 wanted to save his children as much disgrace as possible. That was cred itable, but he was net yet out of the woods. The court was persistent in his i inquiries about the children of the parties. He asked Martin if he was
 fond Of them and he replied that he
 was. In answer to further inquiries Martin said that he had at different
 times sent them money and clothing. : The judge asked him ii he would ike to have the custody of them. The re- l ply was not very prompt, but Martin | finally said that he would take them l as soon as he got into shape to han de" them. The court inquired very carefully into the financial condition of 1 the plaintiff and finding that he had ! an interest in q ranch aLd in some i thing more than i0j head of cattle, he
 stiiQ I-lstl SillS N DUIu HI i to be made by the plaintiff .or the sup | port O. those children. He asked how much Martin thought he could pay. He
 did not know at first whether he could pay anything: he did not feel like it 1 anyhow. when he knew that part | ot whatever he gave would be de i voted by his wife to the support ol 1 the Westbrool, children. The judge told ! him that he would have to contribute i something to the support If his oWa | children and that having been settled | tl.e next thing was to find out how much. Martin described the poverty
 ot his ranch, the uncertainties cf the i cattle business and the cheao oness with
 which children could be raised among 1 AIexicars where his were noW being
 brought up. At last the judge. who
 showed his disgust. fixed the sum Of $l9o
 per year. to be paid quarterly This Vas
 made d part or the decree. which was
 ordered to issue. The first payment
 was to be made on July i. The decree
 is subject to modification. The mother
 of the children is to have q copy of il | and is to he informed that the money paid by Martin is to be applied who'll l ly to the support of his own children