Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1908-01-30

attorney and submitting the facts to
him and obtaining his advice as to-
what was the best thing for her to do
before doing anything in the matter
she had acted greatly to her detri-
ment upon the statement Of defend
ants attorney, although he did not
anticipate such result. Being exclt-
ed, confused and mislead by said writ
ten agreement she did not make her
self clear to her attorney and l am
convinced that she and her attorney
did lot fully understand each other.
No notice of the divorce proceeding
was served upon her, the case was
ard there was no waiver Of notice nor
of the TIME of hearing. and it is APP
parent that the plaintiff did not know
the grounds of divorce until after the
same had been granted. She had given
her attorney no express authority TO
make such waiver for her and the fact
that she did not understand the pro-
ceedings makes it clear that there was
no implied authority for him to do so,
hence the conclusion that the decree
was granted without jurisdiction.
Another Reason.
There is another reason which the
court cannot overlook, that is the
question of public policy. Our law
recognizes the sanctity Of the mar
riage relation and provides that no
divorce shall be granted on the testi-
mony Of the plaintiff alone and that
all such actions shall be heard in open
court. 1t prohibits DEGREES Of divorce
by agreement of the parties. Hasty di-
vorces are more or less a menace to
society and should never be granted
except upon full open and fair show
ing. In this case the matter was
sprung on the plaintiff about the oath
of September, 1907. at which time the
first agreement was signed The petit
ton for divorce was drawn on the 28th
| Of September, filed on the 3Oth and an
swer filed on the same day which was
Saturday, and the decree was granted
on the following Monday, being the
s0th 1t thus appears that this man
| and woman, who together had fam
, lily Of 10 children and were recognized
as honorable, industrious and prosper
GUS people in community, were di-
vorced in less than one weeks time
and within Few hours after the petit
| ton was file1. That fact standing
setting aside the decree, but that fact
coupled with the fact that the wife
was at the time and still is afraid tc
assert her rights and to oppose hel
husband for fear that he will DEPRIVE
| her of the custody Of her two children
| and the further fact or the propert!
arrangement which if carried out viii
leave the plaintiff at the age of 81 with
nothing but her little home and it:
furnishings. without one dollar Of in
come in the world when in all pro.
liability the defendant, If living, viii
be strong prosperous man worth
from twenty-five to thirty Thousand
dollars, leads the court to believe tina
the time will probabl-- come when thu
plaintiff and her friends and thu
public generally as well will regre
that such hasty and inequitable actor
could be had in our courts of justice
Three Attorneys.
The plaintiff has had three separate
attorneys, including intervenors, il
connection with the proceedings, all 0
whom, / think have been disposed t.
represent her fairly. The first at
torney entered an appearance for he
and filed an answer in the divorc
proceedings, the second are the at
torneys Who filed the petition to Sc
aside the divorce decree and the thfr
has appeared for her and filed a mo
ton to dismiss this proceeding. sh
has told her story on the witnes
stand from which it clearly appear
that she still feels that she has bee
: greatly wronged and that she woul
like to have the proceedings in tn