The Hawaiian gazette., 1902-02-25
KAH|l|MA'S
WIFE FREE
A Kauai Senator'S
Spouse Gets a
Divorce.

Tho wife ~ Senator / " Kahilima
81 Kauai. was granted a divorce 10y
Judge Humphreys on the ground of
cruelty. she was allowed also alimony
Of $1,000, an attorneys Zee of $3.50 and
the defendant is required To- pay the
court costs. Kahilma appeared In his
own behalf
when the case was called for trial
yesterday morning the defendant, who
is unable To speak or understand Eng
fish. stated that he was not ready to
proceed as his witnesses were on
Kauai. The court Inquired II he had
not been given two months time to
prepare his case, To which the Sena-
tor replied in the affirmative, and the
court then ordered the plaintiff to pro-
coed. stating that no continuance
could be granted. though he would be
willing TO wait for any witnesses re-
siding i'm Honolulu
Mrs. Kahilima, who was the widow of
$. G. Bertleman, then went on the
stand and told a narrowing tale of the
defendants alleged cruelty. She men
toned divers occasions when he pull
ed her hair, stood upon her. pinched
her and beat her. and called her vile
names. She related one incident of
their married life on Kauai where the
Senator dragged her over a fence by
her hair, and upon one other occa-
sion In Honolulu he is alleged To have
pulled her down a flight of stairs by
the hair. She said that he threatened
one time to pull her bald headed. She
also claimed that he spent from 81 900
to $4,000 of her money i'm riotous living,
and that she was compelled to pay the
household expenses though he was
amply able to do so. She said that he
was addicted to strong drink. and was
insanely jealous of her. accusing her
on many occasions Of going about with
,f.I
called her proud because she bought
everything in her own name, and
wanted her to put her residence in his
name, and when she objected, he mis-
treated her She testified also that
he told her daughter that he would
not allow Mr.. Bertleman's picture to
hang upon the wall, and threatened
bodily injury in case 1t was not re-
moved. The part of the testimony re-
lating to defendants cruelty was cor
roborated by several witnesses and
then Senator kahilima went on the
stand in his own behalf He denied
fatty that he was guilty of the abuses
charged by his wife, ard said that he
mad always been kind to her, and paid
the household expenses. He denied the
charge of drunkenness. or that he
squandeTed money belonging to his
wife. According to his testimony they
were living in peace and pleasure,
lnarFeu only OccaSlOHally by tne usual
quarreis of married life, and the trou
BILE then arose over the children by
his first wife's husband. He said he
treated them kindly, however, but OBJ
Jected to providing for all OF them.
At the conclusion of the evidence
Mrs. Kahlima was questioned as to
her income, and she testified that be-
sides The income of a lease held by a
sugar company and her residence, she
had nothing, and as the lease ran out
in seven years, she would 1hen be de-
pendent upon her sons, who had
agreed To take care of her.
Judge Humphreys, in granting the
divorce, stated that there was some
doubt under the statutes as To whether
a divorce could be granted Tor cruelty
unless the suit was brought within a
year of The time of the commission of
the ofTensc charged. AS the last as
sault was upon December %, 1901, he
iid not know exactly how to construe
the statute, as in case this was q stat
ute of limitations, the failure to bring
the suit after the first crueltes might
be construct to mean that the assault
had been Condoned. There IL abund-
ant evidence, however," said the court
ito justify the divorce, and to render
impossible the refusal of the court to
grant the decree, as to the cruelty
alleged to have been committed De-
cember 30, 1901. The charges in the
complaint that this defendant is ad-
dicted to hab,tuai lntemperance, or
that he suuantlered large sums OF mon
ey, do not find to be true from the
evidence presented, as II was not cor
robOrated The plaintiff says that he
squandered from $1,000 to $1,000 belong
ing TO her, but this testimony is not
corroborated. In fact. from the re-
ceipted bills introduced i'm evidence, it
appears that some OF them were con
tracfed before the marriage, and Che
defendant was under no legal obliga-
ton TO pay them, whatever his moral
duty may have been. Ninety-nine per
cen OF these bills were made out in
The Name of Mrs. n. T.. Bertleman, and
IL is PRESUMED that she contracted
them. The uncontradicted testimony
of defendant shows that he helped to
support the FIVE children of his wife
as well as their mother.
The plaintiff is entitled to some
alimony urder the showing made. II
appears that the defendant is a man
Of considerable property, and in re-
ceipt of an income Of from 81. 500 to
$1,000 per annum. The plaintiff also
owns considerable property; she has
residence at Kalihi which is worth
$4,000 and enjoys and will enjoy for
the next seven years, at least, an in
come of 81 900 from her lease. She
has but two minor children dependent
upon her for support, and in view of
all the circumstances. ! think alimony
I'm the lump sum OF 81 900 will be
about right"
The court based his decree upon the
act OF cruelty committed December %,
1901 and allowed an attorneys fee to
Mr.. McCianahan of $3.50, the defend
ant to pay also the costs of the case.
A stay of execution for one month
was granted for the payment of ALI
mony, attorneys fee and court costs.
IN RoBINSON'S COURT.
Judge Robinson had a busy day yes
terday, passing upon several demur-
rers. hearing an insane matter and
presiding al the trial OF Henry Smith
vs.. Hamakua Mil Company, ejectment.
In the case Of j. Alfred Magoon,
trustee for Sophie Witey ct al. VS.. Lai
Young, Judge Robinson sustained the
demurrer without leave 20 amend, and