The Cairo bulletin. (Cairo, Ill.) 1???-1928, 1906-12-14
COURT DENIES DIVORCE TO THE
MILLIONAIRE PlTTsBURG
PAPER MAKER.
WILL APPEAL HIS CASE
To Higher Courts--Judge Declares
That Evidence Did Not Prove
Wifes Intimacy With the
Coachman as Stated.

ilLloDUIS DtC. To- uc COull ~
day refused a new trial to Hooe, III
negro coachman, recently convicted
of perjury and making false state
mentS regarding the character o
Mrs. Mary Hartje, He was sentence.
t. six years in the penitentiary anC
fined $50
In rather snappy decision of 00(
words Judge Robert S. Fraser denied
the suit, which was by far the most
sensational ever tried in Pittsburg
cour. His rulings, which were very
pointed, are all against Hartje. and
/ the language indicates that there
lnever was a doubt in the mind of the
court as to the innocence of Mrs.
Hartje. who was accused by the
paper king of a heinous crime with
not only Tom Nadine. white coach
man but with Clifford Hooe, a negro
coachnan.
"We cannot conceive that mar
red woman of intelligence and refine
ment and the mother of children
would be guilty of such intimacy with
a male servant, is part of the cold,
hard statement made by Judge Fraser
in his opinion.
The costs Of the trial are put on
Hartie by the court. but as yet no dis
petition has been made of the chill
Mary Louise Hartje and John
Scott Hartje-who for the time at
least, will remain in the care of the
mother.
Hartje Will Appeal Case.
Mr. Hartje announces tonight that
he will appeal the case to the higher
courts.
Il am greatly disappointed and sur
prfsed,'' he said, ..bat we will fight the
case through every court we can, be-
lieving that we are right. | am adj
vised by my attorneys that we have a
good case, and an appeal will be at
once taken. Further than that | have
nothing to say and no comment to
make on the opinion of Judge
Fraser"
Mrs Hartje almost tainted when
told of the decision. She had just re-
turned from Redlands. Ca, with her
in response TO a summons
from her attorneys, to whom Judge |
Fraser intimated that the decision |
could not be rendered unless the |
woman and her children were within
.he jurisdiction of the court.
Thank God, was her first utter
lnce. as in a voice chokcd with relief
and joy she sank into chair and
covered her face 20 hide her emo
ion.
Il am so happy she continued;
the decree vindicates my character
md refutes the blackening charges
Produced against me No more VIII |
)e compelled to hide my face with
hame or tremble for the Sights that
night be placed upon my children. |
IN freed from all guilt, and feel TO
Iappy 10 talk. II is what have con
Identity expected. for the evidence
rom the beginning was clearly and
in my favor. No vindica.
on | could receive would be more
omplete than this. and my thanks
re due TO Judge Fraser, my attor.
eys, the newspapers. and my friends ,
Tho have SO Loyalty stood by me. My
tile ones can now never feel
shamcd of their mother. and oh, this
joy," concluded Mrs. Hartje hys-
arically.
She refused to have anything to
ly relative to pressing her claim for
ivorce. and would no' talk about the !,
isposition of the children.
Finds Evidence Ineonelusive.
In his decision Judge Fraser de
ares that the evidence of Mrs. :,
artie's intimacy with Coachman
ON Nadine is inconclusive. In sub
autiaiion Of this inconclusiveness
idge Fraser cites the following
,ints:
The servants etories of Mrs.
artje's vrongdoing are quite differ
II than those based in Mr.. Hartie's /"
,iition. ="
The s.orv Of Susie Wagner a maid.
as grossly exaggerated and built ="
}: she was prciudiccd and under the
fUence Of Hauje.
Mrs. Hartie perhaps visited the
able too often. but her fondnes : for
,-ses sufTic emily explains what
ight be considered a. nidiscretiOn. =
The letters introduced are open TO y
spicion and are conclusive Of no h. p
&. Experts testimony is Of little ul
hue.
The stealing Of the said letters
lm Mad ne's room. as testified to.
ows these who produced them 10
lavbreakers.
The prsponderance Of testimony ,t'
ows the iefters were not IN Mrs. -