Custer County Republican. (Broken Bow, Neb.) 1882-1921, 1905-03-30
COL. CODY LOSES
COURT FINDS HE is NOT EN-.
TITLED TO A DIVORCE.
DEFENDANT WINS ALL POINTS
Judge Scott of Wyoming Says that the
Plaintiff Failed to Prove Any Of the
Allegations in His Complaint.

SHERIDAN, Wyo.-The district
court here on Thursday refused the
petition of Colonel William f. Cody
buffalo BID for a divorce.
A decision in the case was not ex-
pected before Friday at the earliest,
but the court room was filed with
residents of Sheridan and the sur
rounding country when it was given.
After the reading of the dispositions
was finished the lawyers for both
sides announced that they would sub.
NIT the case without argument. After
a short recess Judge II. II. Scott ask
ed the attorneys for the defendant,
Wilcox & Hallgan of North Platte,
Neb. to amend their answer in the
case by striking out those sections
which dealt with charges against
Colonel Codys conduct in Chicago
and his early excuses at Fort Nc
Pherson. When this was done the
court found entirely in favor of the
defendant, Mrs. Louisa Cody
Judge Scott delivered an opinion of
'OlSluSl dDlc itHSNu, ltNlC"lHS lllc az
legations and evidence and giving his
conclusions.
The law of the state does not
make incompatibility ground for di-
vorce, but it does read that extreme
cruelty, rendering the condition of
either party to the marriage contract
intolerable is sufficient ground to al
low the granting of divorce.
THE first cause of action in this
case is the charge of poisoning on De
cember &c, 1900, or some time prior
thereto. The evidence wholly fails to
support this issue, but shows the de-
PENDANT was trying to rescue the plain
tiff from a state of intoXication and
administered not poison, but remedies
which she deemed beneficial to him.
His inability to speak on this occa-
sion did not come from these rem
edies, but came from his excessive
use of intoxicating liquors at the ban
Quet board, and was as humiliating to
the defendant as to the plaintiff.
"The unhappiness caused by the ac-
tions of the plaintiff is shown by the
letter of their daughter Arta Thorpe,
whose beautiful character shone out
from her unhappy home and the words
of her letter written before her death:
oh papa. why did he do it, My heart
is just broken over it. Oh, why did he
do it?'
Judge Scott also found that the
- h.
part of the defendant toward the col
onels guests was not proven, that
there was no evidence that she had
even threatened her husbands life
and that when attending the funeral
of her daughter Arta at Rochester N.
Y, in February 1904 she offered a
permanent reconciliation and no an
swer ever came to this. He then con-
tinued:
"She was an over-indulgent mother
and wife who always took pride in his
success and always looked forward to
his homecoming and made great pre-
parations TO receive him.
"She entertained his guests with
cordially She did not use profane
language. The poisoning of his pet
dogs was accidental. She never spoke
disrespectfully of him to his friends
or guests. She always accompanied
him to the depot on his departure and
was there to receive him on his re-
turn. In return for this wifely devo-
ton the plaintiff has been cruel to
her and heaped indiguities upon her"
An exception to the ruling of the
court was not noted by Judge II. S.
Ridgley, attorney for Colonel Cody,
and his request for sixty days for fill
ing a petition for a rehearing was
granted.
The motion for a new trial will be
argued at the next term of court and
in case this is denied Cody's attorneys
will take the matter to the supreme
Df