Waterbury evening Democrat., 1904-10-28
TWO DIyORCES GRANTED
Judge Roraback Had Bis Grist of
 Business To-Day.

 erable business, at short calendar in the superior court to-day. Two di- vorces were granted.
 The first one heard was George R. Rubert against Lizzie E. Rubert The plaintiff lives in Naugatuck and the defendant in Hastings-on-the-H Hudson, where, it seems, she was married some time ago. Her husband is John Well. nngton, who was named as co-respon- dent in the case. It was while the Ruberts were living i'll Morristown, N. J., that Wellington first saw the de- fendant. It seemed to be case of love at first sight, for Wellington was constant visitor at their house there after. When they moved to Ansonia he followed, and finally, when they moved to Naugatuck. to get rid of him, he showed up there also.
 Mrs Rubert would not stand for her husbands objections to the mans wis., its and told him it was none of his business Two letters from her re- ceived by her son, 15 years, were read. Tn the first she advised him to burn her letters and not to address his let ters to her In her name, because they did not know in Hastings that she was married to Rubert. In the second she advised him to take care of his money
  eevr he had any to spare. Times were hard with her then, apparently, for she said that if he could find $5 or $1O note hanging around" to send 1t to her. In this letter she intimated that she had married Wellington. In a third letter she asked the boy If his father knew she had married again
 Other testimony was given by Sheriff Rigney. A decree was granted on the grounds of infidelity,
 The case of Charles Roswell against Estella F. Roswell was next heard. Desertion was the allegation ill this case. Plaintiff lives in Southbury and the defendant in Waterbury. She works in hotels and restaurants. Be- cause her husband was .'too slow" for dence of Charles E. Smith, painter, of Oakville She was also interested in other men, too much so to please her husband. About Thanksgiving, in 1900 she left, presumably on visit. She returned a week later, while her husband was at work, and left with her belongings. A month later, when she thought her husband was at work s(he was watchman for the Consoli- dated Railroad Col, she came again. He happened to be at home this time and he wondered why she returned. He told her she might as well have re- mained away and she replied that she had no intention of staying, as the town was too slow for her.
 The other witnesses in this case Brown of Southbury. The petition was granted.
 Mrs Marry F. Seaman, through her counsel, Attofpey Minor, asked for an allowance, pending the hearing of her petition for divorce. Her request was part of the divorce suit her husband brought against her. Mir Seaman was sworn and testified that he is manager for the Danbury Hat Go on Center street and is paid SIP week. He has no other interest in the business and has not been in business for himself, since his wife closed their store with an attachment for $5,OOO in her suit for divorce. A short time before that incident he gave her check for $500 or 5000. That suit was withdrawn and matters went along as smoothly as be- fore. Then, last May, she brought her present suit and closed up the business on Bank street by the attachment al- ready mentioned. Last November he gave her a check for $500. When she brought her suit she had diSmo3ds worth about $1,5OO. She is now work ing for milliner in Bridgeport. He also testified he is the sole support of his father. Decision was withheld.
 James Ferguson, livery keeper in New Haven, was granted reward of $50 for giving information that led to the arrest and conviction of the boys Joseph Brennan and Victor J. Handel for horse stealing. Last week in the superior court the boys were sentenced to six months in jail each.
 A motion to amend the complaint in the suit of the WatertoWn bank against the bondsmen of it's ex-treasurer, Bur- ton H. Mattoon, was allowed. In this matter Attorney Cole, counsel for MT Mattoon, stated that counsel for the defense is at cross purposes. At this juncture Clerk Marsh announced that he had just received telephone mes sage from Attorney Pierce Of Bristol to the effect that he was satisfied to have the complaint amended. This was an instance of the cross purposes mentioned Cor Attorney Cole objested strongly to any amendment.
 Attorney Carmody, counsel for the bank, stated that the proposed amend ment referred merely to the dates in the complaint. Also that the bank is very anxious to have the case heard because until it is heard no one can tell if it is solvent. The bank has been enioined from doing business until its stand~4g is ascertained. The depos- itors want their money and the bank wants the money claimed against the bondsmen.
 The other matters heard were of minor importance.
 A second Spread of Rabies.