The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1909-07-17
FRIDAY BUSY DAY
IN DIVORCE COURT
Matrimonial Ties Of Seven
Wives and Two Husbands
Are Severed.
ORDERS TO SHOW CAUSE
ALSO GIVEN ATTENTION
Sush Is Greatest Seen Since the
New Law Became
Effective.


Armstrong came to the rescue of Judge
Morse and heard one case in which u
decree was granted. Judge Morse
heard several motions for temporary
alimony
D. Il. Chase, a local photographer.
was granted divorce from Fanny
Chase on the ground of desertion. They
were married at Pueblo, Colo. April
%. 1908, and tho plaintiff told the
court that his wife left him on SCI,
tember 10, 1907, and went to Califor-
mia, where she has remained ever since.
and, although he has often requfGcd
her to return to him she has refused
TO do so. He also informed the court
that he was willing to pay his wife
$40 PEI. month so long as she remained
unmarried and an order for alimony
in that amount was made The COM
plant in this case was filed Friday
forenoon.
From the testimony of Gertrude B.
Tesch, it was very evident to the court
that her husband, Ira W. Tesch, did
not intend TO live with her again and
also that he had failed to provide her
with the necessaries of life Consc.
quently, she was granted divorce to-
gether with $50 as attorneys fees and
wns restored to her maiden name. Cert
rude Beckwith They were married at
Rnno. New, on December %, 1903, and
plaintiff deserted his wife on August
IL, 1908, and in November of the same
.yrar wrote to her from Denver saying
that he would not return to her Since
The latter date he has failed to support
hsr
Virginia a. Stoffel was unable to
speak English very we'll and was at
the fiTtt hearing unable to furnish a
witness 10 corroborate her testimony
Later. her witness appeared in court
and she was granted a divorce from
Gerard Stoffel on the grounds of de-
scrtIon and non-support. Thoy were |
married in Belgium in MAY. 1898. and |
have Que child, the custody of which |
was awarded 70 the plaintiff. She |
said that her husband had deserted her |
five wears ago and since that time had |
fS1led 10 support her.
Nra. Gessfort's Plant.
Mrs. Louise Gessford was very badly
treated by her husband, Ralph c. Cess.
ford, according to the testimony intro
duccd by her. She stated that he not
only charged her with infideGty, threat,
cned TO kick her in the face and told
her he wished she would leave him, but
he also spent about $4,000 which she
had when they were married. The mar.
riage took place on August Is. 1906.
She was awarded alimony in the sum
Of $50 per month and $50 as attorney 3
fees.
The story told by Mary Sickles was
one Of intemperance and failure to
provide on the part of her husband. l.
married III Ogden, in 1850. and that for
five years past her husband had been
drinking to such an extent that he
could not support her and she was
compelled to go TO keeping boarders
for living. She is now running
boarding house in Bingham She was
corroborated by her daughter and was
granted divorce.
Sarah f.. Witcomb told the court that
She had been compelled TO leave her
husband, Il, f.. Whitcomb, three times
during their married life because he
fnilcd TO support her and that for some
time past she had been earning her
own living. They were married at
Seattle ON November 23. 1898. Cert
rude B, Tesch, who secured divorce
from her husband earlier in the aft
eruoou. was the star witness for Mrs.
WhItcomb and corroborated her in all
the charges against Witcomb The di
Vorce was granted.
james II. Hatton was evidently very
much abused by his wife. Pearl NJ.
Hatton. whom he married at Kansas
City. Kan, on August Z. 1902. He
said that his wife used vile language
towards him that he could not Tepeat
II to the court. She also struck hlIn in
the face with her fist and flourished
revolver at him, threatening to blow
ont his brains. His fathers deposi-
lion WAS read in support Of his testi-
nony- The father stated that the lam
guage used by Mrs. Hatton towards her
husband was such that only a woman
if 1 10 ~
lieved her TO be such 4 woman. Hat
ION vas granted divorce.
Failure TO Support.
Laura Tyler was divorced from
Charles c. Tyler on the ground OF fail
ure TO support. They were married at
Eernal on December %, 1894, and have
four children, the custody Of whom was
awarded TO plaintiff. Mrs. TYLER
stated that her husband had failed TO
provide for her or the children ever
since July |, 1906.
With tears in her ewes and between
-9bs. Caroline II. DougheTty told Judge
Norse how her husband. J. Il. Dough.
criy. mad left home one SATURDAY. morn.
ing III May and had never returned TO .
her. She said that on that night he ,
telephoned. and told her that he would :
not come back, although she begged
him on account Of the children to re- ,
that there were too many folks at the
house as they were then living with /
her folks. she then asked him If he
would not move with her TO another
house: but he refused 10 do so. Since
he left. she said that he had given her
only 50 for the support OF herself and
ivo children, although he earned SI5 !
per week. She was awarded $50 per ,
month AS separate maintenance and $50
as attorneys fees. E
Charles s Rule was before the court
10 show cause WHY he should not paw
his wife. Winnifred alimony and at. ,
Iorney;s fees pending the hearing OF
her action for divorce. She stated that
her husband left her on December Is
last, since which time ne had given
ner $23 in cash and the same amount
OF merchandise. Rule testified that he
earned $3.50 per. day and that he had
several suits against him on which he
mad to make payments in order TO ,
secp them from garnisheeing his wages. :
He was ordered to pay his wife $40
per month temporary alimony and $50 {
aftoruoVfe foes