The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1907-10-01
NO HOME FOR her
Mrs. Emma McCormiek's Story
of Marital Infelicity.
Husband a Commission Man in
Kansas City.
HE PREFERS ANOTHER
Wife Neglected While He Seeks
Gre unds for Divorce.
Asks Only for Alimony to Care
for Children.

Some rather unusual charges are
made by Mrs. Emma Blanche McCor-
mick in suit which she filed with the
clerk OF the district court yesterday
afternoon for alimony and equitable
relief for the support of herself and
family of four children from Joseph
L Mccormick. her husband. who is a
member of the commission firm OF
Harrington. Mccormick & Co., of
| Kansas City, Kan. Among these
| charges are ones to the effect that
Mr.. Mccormick was back of divers
schemes to place his wife in compro-
missing positions so that he would be
a bic to obtain evidence against her
which would warrant his securing a
divorce. Mrs. Mccormick declares
that her husband wants such a divorce
for the purpose of marrying a woman
of Kansas City. Mo-, for whom he has
had mad infatuation for more than
a year. Another rather unusual fea-
ture of Mrs. McCormick's suit is that
she does not ask for a divorce but
merely for aIimony and relief for the
support of herself and children
According to her petition in the suit
Schoch. Hotchkiss and Wilson, she
and Mr. Mccormick were married on
November %, 1889, at Zeandale, Riley
county. and lived there until three
Kansas City. Mo-. where they made
their home while Mr.. Mccormick s
business in the commission firm was
located in Kansas City, Kan. Within
few months Mrs. Mccormick and
her children have moved from Kansas
City to this city, where they are now
ma king their home. These children
are Lillith Virginia, II years old;
Chester Lanse, II years old; Scottie, s
years old, and Cecil Ross years old.
ok ha "a
her husband, with their family lived
happily together until the forepart of
1906 when he began to neglect his duties
to his family and in various ways
began to deceive and rnisleSd her as to
his goings and comings because he
was infatuated with certain woman
in Kansas City, Mo- Mrs. Mccormick
states that her husband frequently told
her about this time that he had to go
out of the city on business for a few
days when as a matter of fact he pass
ed this time in the society of this wo-
man.
She gays that along about Christmas,
1906 he came to her and said that he
had discovered it would be impossible
for them to live together longer. She
also heard that he had plans made just
about this time to go to Utah Along
in June and July of that year. she al
leges. he made various orers TO ner OF
a settlensnt of property rights and that
these offers were always made with the
provision that she permit him to get
divorce from her. She says that on
September 25. 1906. he offered to pay her
the lump sum of $4,000 for the support
of herself and children provided sne
would let him get divorce She replled
to this proposition with the statement
that he had no grounds for asking Tor
a divorce and that he knew this He
insisted that he be permitted to get a
divorce at the October. 1906, term OF
court in Kansas City. Mo. and declared
that IL she did not take $4,000 he would
fix Ii so that she could get but $50 per
month for the support of herself ana
family. She replied to these PROPOSE
lions by stating that he could not get
divorce and that the money ne orrered
her was not enough for the support OF
herself and family. She states tnal
from, that time on he refused to contrib
11te to the support of herself and family
in any way and that they had to vacate
the house they lived in for nonpayr1eht
of rent It was then that Mrs. NC
Cormick decided to remove with her
family to this city and she declares that
she had to borrow money to pay back
rent so that she could get her household
goods out of the place.
She also had to borrow money to
move here to Topeka and declares that
she and the family are now in need
of support Before removing to this
city and being ousted from the Kansas
City home, Mrs Mccormick says that
occasions and that when he did he
cursed and swore at her applying 10
her such remarks as = wish you were
in h with your back broke ana
there is where you ought to be-
Then Mrs Mccormick goes on to
aver in her petition that on various oc-
casions while she and her husband
were still living together in casual
sort of a way in Kansas City. he was
the promoter of schemes to drag her
down morally. On one occasion she
asserts that he procured person to
call her up on the phone and represent
himself as the family physician This
person tried to make an appointment
with her and she says he made In
decent propositions to her She FOUND
out that 1t was not the family physf>
clan who called her up ana declares
that it was but scheme on the part
of her husband for getting some clue
or excuse for getting a divorce from
her But she did not fall into the
trap
On another occasion she states that
her husband got a woman to- can ner
up over the phone This woman trieI
to have her make an appointment to
meet some gentlemen friends at the
Baltimore hotel She avoided this
trap, she says and she mentions, gen.
orally. several other occasions when
she received phone messages to meet
men and women at various places She
fought shy of all of them and insists
that they were instigated by her hus-
band who had a desire to manufa cture
evidence against her which would war
rant him securing divorce.
Mrs. Mccormick tells OF one time
when she and several other persons
saw her husband riding along the Ben
ton boulevard in Kansas City with the
other woman at o'clock at night,
when he had told her that he was go
ing to leave town at 1880. She says
that she called up his office several
times by phone to ask where he -as
and was told by clerks in the office
that he was sick at home when, as
Mrs. Mccormick asserts, he was not
home at all but was out trif1ing with
this other" woman.
Mrs Mccormick lists the property a.