Waterbury Democrat., 1902-05-16
TWISTED DIVORCE.
Case in Court Which Was Hard
 to Unravel.
DECREE FINALLY GRANTED


 Flora, Made No Defense-The Case
 Of Attorney susan c. O'Neil1 Against Mrs Smith Was Granted q Special Hearing
 A most peculiar divorce case was tried before Judge Robinson i'll the superior court at short session to-day. The case was that of Israel Morans and Flora Morans. The allegation was desertion and the case presented by Attorney Sweeney of Naugatuck The defendant was not represented. Morans testified that his marriage took place in Hartford in July, 1893, and that his wife soon after deserted him. Mrs Morans' people all live in the Capitol City. The reason for her deserting her husband was that he fell i'll and his illness developed into insanity. As he was not a citizen there was some bother about getting him admitted to any of the state in stituions for the insane. However, he did not see his wife for about ten months, during which he was in hos pital. After his release from hospital his wife returned to him, but not un- til after he had used great deal of persuasion to her and her folks. They 1 thereupon resumed domestic life and for while were evidently happy. Such is the surmise because nothing was said to the contrary by plaintiff 1 in his evidence. Then his old illness came back upon him and like before l insanity followed. By this time he had become citizen and there was no bother i'll getting him admitted to the state asylum for the insane. But his return was puzzle to the physi- clans. in what respect plaintiff did not say. He was about a year in the hospital this time before he was dis I charged. His wife. he found. was living with her people in Hartford, but this time she would not return to l live with him. Nothing could persu- ade her to this. Plaintiff then sought for employment. His regular occu- patton Is bookkeeping, but misfortune met him everywhere he applied for work and he took up peddling for | time. Once again he fell sick. This time l he went to Canada to be cured and he was not long in hospital there before he was discharged. Then he set out to find his wife. He located her in Union City, living with one Benjamin Engleman. store keeper on Spring street She refused to return to her husband on any account. Sheriff James E. Sweeney of Naugatuck tes- tified that the woman told him she had procured divorce from her rabbi and was living contentedly with her second husband to whom she was mar ried by the rabbi who gave her the divorce decree from the plaintiff. 1 Wsan the sheriff saw her child had been born to her and Engleman and since then another child had come to them Michael Fannick and Police man Anthony Malone of Union City testified for the petitioner. The pc tifion was granted.
 Laura c. Spring of Wolcott asked divorce from Dr William T. Spring on the grounds of desertion. Attorney Bradstreet represented the plaintiff: the defendant was not represented. This case Is familiar to great many. Defendant was known as the travel l ing dentist. He was before the dis trict court for non-support some time ago. The parties were married on March 31. 1892, i'll New Rochelle, N. Y From there they moved to Dan bury and it was there the alleged de- sertion took place. Plaintiff then re- turned to her parents home in Wolcott and has lived there ever since. 1t was l testified that the defendant moved to Unionvllle and became acquainted with Mrs Francis. This woman went on the road with the defendant and in l Springfield they were arrested for i'm 1 proper conduct and tried and the jury disagreed. Mrs Springs father. Gus 1 taye. her sister Emma Cornelis. and her 1 uncle, Clement, testified for her. She was granted her petition and her maiden name restored to her This constituted the work of the divorce mill for the day. Cases assigned for hearing are as follows: Monday, James Gallagher's appeal from probate; Charles F. Richards vs George IT, Peck two cases; Gaffnev vs Gouche; Wednes- day. Robert K. Brown ct al vs city of Waterbury. Lottie II. platt Stephens vs Louis IT. Stephens q contested di- 1 vorce. and Monday, May 26 special as- signment. Brennan vs Berlin Iron Bridge Co.,
 1 bate was taken off the short calendar list and bond of S400 was ordered in the suit of John Kerwin vs the Bryan ] Bros. A motion for order to pay the 1 final dividend in the Parsons bank case was allowed and the account of the receiver and his order of distribution for the Masonic Temple association was approved, A special hearing was granted Attorney Susan c. O'Neill in her contention with her old client, Mrs Mary E. Wright Smith. This was motion to sat aside judgment for fees for about $7,500. Miss O'Neill claimed S9O0O
 Miss O'Neill's case was taken care of by herself. her father and Attor- ney Isabella M. Pet$ls of New York,
 while Mrs Smiths interests were in the hands of State Referee Newton
 The plaintiffs evidence consisted of q fair-sized trunk of correspondence and fifteen boxes of motions, pleas in abatement. Judgments, demurrers, bonds, counter motions, answers com plaints, briefs bills in equity and bills out of equity and all the bubbles and technicalities of the law In q word. o11 4I,n r,anafc fin fla racr,nafira foc ac