Putnam patriot., 1914-03-27
HOWARTH
 DISBARRED
Matrimonial Bonds of Two POmfret
 Couples Severed
Eighteen Extra Jurors Drawn

Eighteen Extra Jurors Drawn
 There was short calendar session of the Superior court in sthis city Fri day morning with Jaage Shumway presiding.
 Ind first thing taken up was the presentation by States AttorneySearls of facts in the matter of charges of misconduct of Attorney Frank E. Ho- warth. The papers were served on Howarth while he was in Brooklyn jail awaiting transportation to the state prison. No one appeared for Howarth. Attorney Searls said that matter had come to his attention rela- tive to the character, conduct and in tegrity of Frank k, Howarth, mem- Der of the bar, which 1t was his duty to present to the eonrt. He then set out the facts of Howarth's arrest, trial and conviction, after he had pldad guilty, to the charge of arson, and his confinement at the prison. The record of the proceedings i'll the Howarth case, was then read. The Judge or dered finding drawn up for him to sign indefinitely suspending Howarth as an attorney-at-law until further or- der of the court.
 Two divorces were then granted, both of the cases being from Pomfret. Eli Radger, for 15 years a resident of Eli otts, was given a decree from his wife Florence on statutory grounds. They were married in Eastford, March 2Sth, 1901, and went immediately to live on his tarm in Elliotts. He became sus- picious that she was too intimate with s farm hand whom he employed and finally convinced himself or the fact. Fred w. Cunningham, n neighhor, and Rev. George F. Genung, of Brooklyn, were also witnesses, the latter having employed Mrs. Badger as domestic after her husband had put her out.
 Eva G. Medbury was given decree from Daniel $. Medbury, whom she had not seen since the night they were married, on the ground of desertion. Mrs. Medbury testified that she was married by Rev. J. J Elty at the Cath oiic rectory In Ponfret, on the night of August 18th, i910 Her husband told her that night that he was going to Hartford the next morning. After the ceremony each went to the home Of their parents in Pomfret and she did not see her husband again. She re- ceived letter from him q part of which she had in court He told her in the letter that they might live together sometime and they might not. He said she could write to him but asked her not to tell her family what was In his letters. He said if they lived together their life was bound to be unpleasant. She received post card from him two weeks later and that is the last she heard of him al- though she had written to him. She has only known by hearsay where he l has been since. He had never made a home for her nor had he contributed to her support, although she was always ready to live with him. The pIaintifi's s father and mother, MT. and Mrs. Mur- ray of Pomfret, corroborated her story. She was given the custady of her four year old daughter.
 Eighteen extra jurors were drawn for the case of Joseph Bernier, admin istrator, vs the Woodstock Agricultu. ral society. Those drawn were as fol ! lows:
 William k. Reach, Fred ! erick k. Miller.
 | Canterbury-A. Hale Bennett. Chaplin--John M. Clark. Eastford-Charles A. Walker. Hampton, w. II. Warden. KiIlingly, 1. Alexander Reeves, Ed.
 ward A. Sullivan, Elmer 0. Mathew. | son.
 Plainfield, Edward NJ. Allen, Urgele | LaFrance, Daniel 0. Lillibridge. Scotland, Gerald Waldo. l Sterling, Walter Vaughn. Windham, Edward B. Latham, ,J ohn
 F. Carr, AlphoDse Gelinas, Napoleon
 Bacon, Jr.