The true northerner. [volume] (Paw Paw, Mich.) 1855-1920, 1915-10-29
CIRCUIT COURT
PROCEEDINGS
MANY CHANCERY CASES DIS
POSED OF; CRIMINAL CAL
ENDAR ON TRIAL.

Fred j. Johnson, accounting was taken
under advisement by the court.
The First State bank of Marcellus
VS.. Julia Fl. Fletcher, foreclosure. De-
cree entered in favor of complainant
jim sum of $4,000.
\ Divorce Granted.
4 The divorce case of Mae Crippen VS..
Edward Crippen, was heard by the
court and decree entered granting di-
vorce and giving the custody OF the
two children to the grandparents, Mr..
and Mrs. Geo. Crippen. The complain
ant alleges cruelty and is the out
come of the criminal case, wherein her
husband cut her with a knife, and
who is now serving a term in Jackson
prison.
Bowerman VS.. Bowerman.
The case of Effie ID. Bowerman VS.
Charles Bowerman, divorce. Decree
granted and complainant was given
500 alimony. The bill of complaint
alleges that Efie Bowerman, late OF
Decatur township. married Charles
Bowerman on November 10, 1896, and
they lived together until April 8, 1913;
that six children were born to them
that Charlie afterwards abandoned
and deserted her for upwards of two
years without reasonable cause; that
he repeatedly stated he did not love
her and wanted her to leave aim; that
he utterly refused to provide her with
money, food or clothing The court
granted her request for separation.
The custody of four of the children
was awarded to the father.
GaiIhouse VS.. Gailhouse.
A decree of divorce was granted to
Charles Gailhouse from his wife, Lena
Gailhouse. The parties to this case
are residents of Decatur township and
were married in Paw Paw by Justice
Killefer, September 6, 1906, and lived
together until the 18th day of May,
1914 Three children were born to
them, whose ages range from to Z
years. The bill of complaint alleges
that on or about May II she went to
live with Frank Smith of Decatur, and
took her family Of children to the new
home; that she has lived with Smith
ever since except for three weeks,
when she returned to her husband
February Is, 1915, and again returned
to Smith on March 10, and she is liv-
ing with Smith against the protest of
her husband. The court granted the
complainant's plea for separation from
Lena. Attorney Walter Jones Of Mar
cellus, represented the complainant.
People VS.. Prehn.
The case of the people VS.. Don
Prehn occupied the courts attention
Monday and part of Tuesday. This is
a Lawton case, whereby the complain
ant, Hester Smith, accuses Don Prehn
with being the father of her child.
The evidence showed that she lived
the past eight or nine years in the
same neighborhood with Prehn, and
became acquainted and intimate with
him; that she left the home of her
father, Wm Smith, in July, 1914, and
went to live with Mary Prehn until
the latter part of November. She be-
came intimate with Prehn in July and
on the 9th day of June, 1915, gave
birth to her child. The jury brought
in a verdict of guilty.
People VS.. WhippIe.
The case of the people VS.. Ralph
Whipple, assault with intent to MUIR
der, was begun on Tuesday and went
to the jury on Wednesday night. After
being out few hours, the jury re,
turned a verdict of assault and bat
terry. This is the case from Almena
which was mentioned in The True
Northerner some time ago. The case
is the outgrowth of sonin-law and
mother-in-law differences.
People VS.. Ward Foster.
The case Of the people VS.. Ware
Foster, wife abandonment, came t.
trial Thursday and the jury is out al
we go to press.
People VS.. kominski.
This case is set for hearing toda!
friday. This is the case from
Geneva township wherein the defend
ant is charged with using knife OF
a man named Davis, railroad mai