Waterbury evening Democrat., 1903-05-29
THREE DIvORCES.
Judge Wheeler Separated Six
 Unhappy Persons
POLICE OFFICERS TESTIFY.

We're Absent Oakville Trolley Cues
 ton. in Which Trolley co Tiled s
 Demurrer, Was Up Again To-Day.
 The contested divorce case Of Jennie
 Cornelis vs Clement Cornelis opened
 the divorce mill at short calendar int the superior court to-day before Judga
 Ralph Wheeler. Attorney Kennedys
 appeared for the plaintiff and Rogers for the defense. The defendant enfer< ed counter suit on the grounds of de-4
 sertion, which also was the allegation in the plaintiffs suit Mrs CorneIiss
 asked for the restoration of her formers
 name, Corcoran. She was married
 January IS, 1897 and claimed that foaE.3
 and six days later defendant deserted
 her and that she supported herself byT keeping g grocery and a boarding house at 38 Scovill street. By her pre- 1 y1ous marriage two children were born l She testified that she owns the prop- erty which she occupies at 38 Scovfl1 I street and that because she refused f3 E deed it over to her husband he Ieft her. Some time after the separat tfou she happened to meet him on the Wol-s l colt road and he told her he would ! return to her if she would sign the property over to him. Before he left J finding she would not allow him to eol- s lect the rent or give him any share of the property he took all the goods out of the grocery store. Soon after he filed suit for divorce
 Mrs Annie A1ger, 36 ScoviII street. l a tenant of Mrs Corcaran, Margaret
 Mccormack, IT ScoviIl street, Janaes Darling, and James Nolan testified for the complaint. The petition was grant. ed
 Harry F. Floyd, once q conductor 0f the trolley cars, sued for separation from his wife, Dora, housekeeper for Dentist s. W. Chipman, on the grounds of desertion. The troubles of these people at one time were the talk of ths town. Floyd told of his living with his 1 wife on West Main street and of his l finding her gone one evening and let- 1 ter telling she was tired of him ana cared no longer to live with him. She 1 then went as housekeeper to Dr Chip
 man on Center street At first Floyd could not believe all he has heard | waited for her one night and in a talk with her all his doubts were removed. l Sergeant RlakeIy testified to seeing l Mrs Floyd and the dentist frequently together, and Detective Dodds festis
 fled substantially the same. A divorca was allowed.
 1 The next and last case was Nancy
 E. Lewis vs Francis Lewis Thesa parties were married September 28s I 1896, and on February TO- 1898, defend
 ant disappeared. The custody of one
 minor child. Edward ID. Lewis, was
 asked for The trouble it seemed was the physical condition of Lewis, who has been in i'll health. The relations l between the parties appeared to ba
 amicable but defendant will not live
 with him. Plaintiff is not strong. His l physicians recommend him to go and l live in the Adirondacks or in the coun- l try, but defendant prefers the city4
 Francis S. Fitch testified and the pe- tition was granted along with the cus-s tody of the child.
 l George Alderman of Oakvil1e wa1 appointed temporary receiver of the grocery store in Brooklyn conducted by
 the Cruszanski- Urbin Go with bond l of S1,5O0.
 l Judgment was allowed by default to the Waterbury Lumber 6 Coal Ca
 ys Charles H. Payne.
 A motion for further order of notic9
 was allowed in the divorce case o6 l Catherine Metz vs Joseph Metz. The
 defendant is supposed to be in eitheE Bavaria, Australia or New York in which places he has number of relae itves Metz at one time was 3 well
 known tailor here and looked upon as an cratic character.
 The affairs of the Domestic Pie Bake 1 inc Go were down for another airing l but as all the conflicting interests were
 not represented, the matter went over l Tn the matter of the appeal of the l city from the decision of the railroad commission in the Oakville trolley case, the trolley company filed demur-
 Ter, stating that the city did not state
 any special grounds upon which it based it's appeal. The court suggested 1 that the reasons of appeal be made a
 part of the proceedings, as the demur-
 Ter attached the entire situation. With
 this understanding the matter was continued.
 In the cases of BoIger and Hayes ya l the Consolidated Railroad Go judge ment was given in each case for S20 1 with the costs This is $5 less than nominal damages. The first case was l for S2,OO0 and the latter for $1,000.
 Defendants demurrer In the case of Jay M Pierce against the city was
 overruled, and judgment for $1,017 and costs was given the plaintiff. Tn the l suit of Jennie c. Barnes vs the Con-
 solidated Railroad Go, she sued for l $2,5OO Attorney O'Neilrs motion to l strike out in his case against Mary E. l w. Smith was sustained, as was also his motion for disclosure in the eases of Partree vs Atwood.