South Bend news-times. (South Bend, Ind.) 1913-1938, 1913-09-17
DIVORCE MILL IN
Z HOURS AND HALF
GR|NDS 6 DEGREES
Mounts Case of "Pretended"
Marriage is Held Up-Ro-
hene LightfOOt Thought She
Was Divorced.

1 udy wednesday IN the superior court
for the hearing Of uncontested divorce
suits, promised to exceed that Of the
hrst Tuesday. Ten cases were set for
nearlns ana they were expected to
| occupy the eutire externoon. One d.
Vorce was granted Wednesday morn
| ing. Katie StrouS obtained a decree
from Wesley Strous, although II was
1 held up pending the hearing OF one
| Jurisdlctional witness
Grinding steadily from 1880 o'clock
| until 4 O'Clock Tuesday afternoon, the
| divorce mill in the superior court
turned out six DEGREES. Two of the
| divorces, however. were held UP
| pending the examination OF jurisdic-
| tional witnesses. A seventh case was
heard, but owing TO a legal complica-
\ ton which II presented, the case was
taken under Amusement by Acting
Judge Woodward.
1t was default day" in the super
! Tor court None Of the defendants
In the divorce suits appeared 10 con-
test the suits The plaintiffs number
ed five women and one man.
| Although there were no defenses
to any of the actions Judge Wood
ward insisted on searching inquiry
| into the grounds for divorce In one
case he granted the decree of divorce
to the wife but held up his ruling IN
awarding the custody Of the child, a
-Olu DONs unLll ne could de-
| termine whether she was able TO care
| for him.
1T is not that 1 think the mother
| ought not TO have her child. but I
/ want to find out if she is undertaking
too much of a burden in assuming
custody of the boy" explained the
acting Judge The boy is now stav-
ing with his grandparents and the
mother proposes to bring him to her
! brothers house where she is staying
while she works at the watch factory
for SO a week. Judge Woodward
asked to have the brother brought in
| Wednesday before giving his decision
! on the custody.
Much Infelicity.
The stories of domestic infelicity
revealed several interesting legal
complications. One case heard Tues
day was tried seven years ago in the
circuit court but the decree was never
| entered because the costs we're not
| paid at that time. The woman had
! subsequently, married. but her second
| husband secured an annulment on the
ground that his wife was a bigamist.
| The decree granted Tuesday ends the
difficulty.
One Of the cases which attracted
most attention was that of William
! Mounts against Olive Mounts, which
Judge Woodward took under advise
ment. Mounts claims he married the
woman in st. Joseph, Mich, Feb. 8,
! 1913. Three days before the woman
had obtained a divorce from John
] Rank in the circuit court here. In
/ the decree was included a court order
| not to marry for two years which
| the statute provides when a divorce
| is granted and the defendant is not
a resident of the state.
On the witness stand Tuesday
J Mounts admitted his wife told him of
/ nFOhihiflnCr r.
riage and said they went TO St Jo-
seph to evade the order, returning to
live in Mishawaka. In his complaint
Mounts treats the ceremony at st. Jo-
seph as a pretended" marriage and
asks the annulment on the ground
Of fraud. A question for the court in
deciding the case is to determine
whether Mounts, admittedly a party
10 the fraud, is entitled TO annulment.
Atty Charles Bingham, representing
Mounts, will submit a brief on the
proposition TO the court before the
decision is rendered.
Thought Divorced.
Rohene Lightfoot is the woman who
for years thought herself divorced
from Joseph Lightfoot and didn't
learn otherwise until a subsequent
hubsand rid himself Of her on the
ground that she had husband when
he married her
She was married to Lightfoot Nov.
%. 1902, and separated from him
Aug. 9, 1906. The same year the
divorce was filed and tried in the
circuit court. The decree was rem
dered. as all divorces are in the local
courts, subject TO the payment Of the
costs The costs were never paid, it
is alleged, through the neglect of an
attorney, and Mrs LightfoOt remain
ed in ignorance Of the omission.
Judge Woodward granted the decree
on the ground of cruelty.
A mother and her daughter were
among the women who obtained de-
crees. Mrs. Hattie Abbot was given
a divorce from James Abbot on the
ground of nOn-suppOrt and her
daughter. Anna Long, was divorced
from Eugene Long on the same
grounds.
band refused TO support her but in
sisted on living up $4,000 which she
had in her own right when she mar
ried Long. In three years $4,000 dis
appeared for clothing and board, she
alleged. The Longs lived with Mrs.
Longs mother. she said, because her
husband insisted that he would not
set up in housekeeping unless she
bought property and had II placed in
Emma Van Scoik charged that her
husband. John Van Scoik, was &C
customed TO coming nome oronh
nearly every night. When he APP
preached home he fired of his re-
volver and on entering the house
brandished the weapon. she charged,
frightening the entire family.
THE two boys were almost grown
men then" said Mrs. Van Scoik. but
they were so scared they jumped be
hind me and I had to protect the
whole flock Of them"
Mrs. Van Sock said her husband
vould provide food and clothing but
would never let her have any money.
He never gave me nickel YOU
might say" she testified. When the |
check came for the rent of my prop
erty in Elkhart he would open the
envelope, sign my name 70 II and
get the money. l never saw any OF
IL"
Matilda Bell alleged that J. Fletcher
Bell was home only one whole night
during the last two years they were
together. She testified her husband
,,sT5 the house rent but that she had |