Waterbury evening Democrat., 1906-12-07
THREE DIVORCE CASES
1he Gizeb Cise Continued Oss Week
 By Judgo Cass.

Suu6o SdSo tO-uay m the superior court administered severe rebuke to the principals in the ex parte d. vorce suit of Elnathan Gazely agains. Adelaide Gazely. The plaiLtiff was on the stand and his counsel, Attor- ney Joseph E. Lauber, made the sensa- tional statement that Mrs Gazely
 had agreed to let the case go by de-
 fault provided her child, girl, was
 to remain in the custody of herself and her husbands mother. She thus
 forfeited the right of the child to
 an extent that was not approved of
 by the court. who held that in suc.l circumstances the child's upraising
 would be endangered if the allega-
 tions against her mother wero
 proven. Infidelity was the basis of
 the suit.
 Gazely, who is foreman for the
 Oakville Co, testified that he has
 been married eleven years, and one
 child was born to him. Two years
 ago, he said, he was told to be on his
 guard against his wife's conduct and
 he thereupon kept strict lookout.
 Previous to this, however, he was
 surprised why she was from home al-
 most every evening, and one evening
 he followed her on South Main
 street. up Scovill street, onto South Elm street, and saw her get into a
 buggy. He then went up to the
 buggy and asked his wife what she
 meant by riding with man who wat
 stranger to him. George Boden.
 he said, was in the buggy. He had some talk with Boden, during which
 his wife left the buggy and went
 away, where he did not know. This
 ended his relations with her and soon after she left town. When Mrs Gaze ly found she was to be charged with unfaithfulness she said she would contest the suit, but 1t seems a com promise was made by which she would be enabled to see the child ar her pleasure.
 Gazely said that Boden, or the man in the carriage, asked him to keep
 quiet about his discovery, and Gazely
 said he would not keep quiet for $1.- 900.
 In disposing of the suit Judge
 Case said he wanted 1t understood that he would not grant divorce on l the allegations stated, for the rights of the child were grievously endan- gered, and he would continue the | case one week to give Mrs Gazely an opportunity to appear, provided she wished to have the joint custody of I the child with her grandmother. T | wish," said Judge Case. "to have 1t understood right now that the court 1 repudiates this agreement about the child. I will continue the case one
 week so that the defendant shall
 have an opportunity to defend her.
 self"
 Sadie Smith was allowed a divorce from Clarence Smith on the grounds of desertion. The Smiths were mar
 ried in October. 1901, and in 1903 Smith disappeared. A child was born l to them six weeks before that. Mrs | Smith, whose maiden name was Bryan. and is a sister Of the Bryan Bros, the builders, said she was mar ried in Pittsburg, Pa, and pretty soon after trouble began for her. Her husband wrote her from Sheepshead
 Bay that it was all up with him. He was down and out and that was the end of him. Mrs Smith came on to Waterbury and took up quarters with her sister on Walnut street. In his communications about her he was most considerate. but he never re- turned to her.
 Gertrude M. Reich applied for di- yorce on the grounds of intolefable
 cruelty, and she also asked for tho restoration of her maiden name. Shs testified she was married in Brews- ters, N. Y.. in October, 1904. and In July, 1906. her husband left her. AZ times she has worked for the Water
 bury Clock Co. Soon after marriage her husband betrayed feature in his makeup that she was not cogniz- ant of before. He repeatedly beat her. One night he took home q friend named Lewis. and this man in-
 suited her. Still she did not leave home. she told the court. She now lives on Fairview street. Decision was reserved.