Arizona republican., 1905-12-17
DIVORCE DEFENDANT
 FAMILIAR WITH LAW
The Case of 4. J. Dasss Sent to Yava-
 rai County.

Mrs. Ethel c. Hairgrove was yester- day granted a divorce from George Hairgrove, who is now an inmate of the state penitentiary of Texas at Rusk. The fact that he is a convict is the sole allegation of the complaint which is supported by the record of the Texas court in which Hairgrove was convicted. There were two indict- mentS against him in October 1901 In each case he was charged with the theft of a mule and was convicted un- der each indictment. In the first case he was sentenced to three years in the state penitentiary and in the second to two years, the service of the latter sentence to begin on the expiration of t,.e first.
 Among the evidence in the case there was a letter written to the plain tiff by the defendant who had just been informed that his wife had begun proceedings against him. The letter is something of an epistolary curiosity, and shows that Hairgrove knew some thing if he did not know how to get away with mules.
 He acknowledged the receipt of the citation and called the attention of his wife to some apparent defects in the proceedings and suggested their cor rection, He said that in applying for a divorce he believed she was acting wisely and he reminded her that he had advised her to take that action before. It was plain that they could never live together again and in con cluding he asked Gods blessing upon her and upon their little son.
 It was important he said, that what ever was done in the matter of the divorce should be done properly, other wise it would be a thorn in the flesh for both Of them. He advised that if she would wait until the completion of his sentence which would expire in four months and ten days. he could assist her. He again pointed out err TOTS made in the return of the sum mons and said that it would be for her good to have therl corrected. Hair grove said that he did not know what the Arizona law on the subject might be, but there was little about the Tex as law with which he was not familiar He said that when he had rubbed up against the real thing he could not avoid taking on some polish. The de- cree was granted.
 In the case of A. J. Daggs the case was sent to Yavapai county on a change of venue. The court had had it
 
 close of the hearing of the motion for a change of venue on Friday but on the objection of the district attorneys office he did not then reach the final decision.
 In the case of E. A. Spaulding against F. Sunderland tried a week ago, an action for the recovery of commission on a real estate deal, the defendant was given judgment. In a similar ac- tion by Herbert Taylor against Err nest w. Gragg, the defendants motion for a new trial was denied In the case of Peter Nelssen against the Salt River Valley Canal company a peti- tiOn for an annulment of the proceed ings in the court below was granted In the suit of Aaron l.. Doran against w. H. Kay there was Judgment for the property is dispute for the plaintiff on the payment of $1,132.97, the judgment then to become a lien upon the prop erty.
 In the matter of Carrie A. Lount and others against Thomas Hayes and oth- CTS, Hayes demurrer to the second amended complaint was overruled. The separate demurrers of the other de- fendants to the supplemental com plaints were overruled. The suit of the territory eX. rel. Hayden against George W. Kretzinger was dismissed the motion of the plaintiff having been brought erroneously. In the follow ing cases motions for new trials were reset for hearing next law day: T. N. Clanton against Buckeye Canal and Land company; J. H. Pershing against Buckeye Canal and Land company; New Vulture Mining company against Charles Kinsley and others; F. G. Fisher against J. N. Ellison.