The Democratic banner. (Mt. Vernon, Ohio) 1898-192?, 1916-06-20
field DAY
FOR DIVORCES
-Four Petitions In Hour Shat.
ter Records

All speed records for the filing of
divorce petitions were shattered at
the office of Clerk of Courts Guy Tay-
lor Thursday afternoon when three
attorneys appeared within an hour
and deposited papers of four people
who have discovered that the nuptial
contract is not one, wild round of
ecstatic bliss and whose experiences
have made them SO bitter toward mar
riage that they desire to shake off
its shackles.
A singular feature of the petitions
is that all four charge gross neglect
of duty, while two specify drunken
ness as cause for action. One cites
post-nuptial contract in which dis
position of property had been arrang-
ed, evidently with the desire of just
quitting.
Not only was the surfeit of divorce
petitions record-breaker from a
standpoint of speed, but also in re-
spect to quantity as no such field day
for like actions could be recalled
around the court house.
George Robb VS.. Sala Robb was the
first fled Plaintiff recites that they
were married on April IL, 1899, and
that two children, Ferdinand, aged 16,
and Raymond, aged IL, were born to
them. He states that on June 2, 1916,
post-nuptial contract was entered
| into by defendant and himself where
| by all property rights were settled
and he was given custody of minor
children. On the grounds of gross
neglect of duty, he asks for a divorce
and ratification of the contract. l..
G, Stillwell is his attorney.
Second in line was the petition of
John Q. Worley VS.. Emma Worley.
They were married on Nov. 8, 1913,
and no children were born, He al
leges faithfulness, but charges that
in return she circulated bad stories
| about and made all manner of verbal
attacks against him. Further, he
states that she charged him with be-
ing cruelty intimate with a grand
daughter who resided with them. On
the grounds of gross neglect and ex-
treme cruelty, he, through his attor-
ney, Hugh Neal, asks for divorce.
Several years ago, Mrs. Worley lnsti-
tuted a divorce action against her
husband, but the same was dismissed
Mollie Olive Lybarger VS.. Nell Ly-
barger is the title of the third action
One child, Mary Emmalene, aged g.,
was born to this marriage which was
solemnized on July 4, 1898. She
charges her husband with habitual
drunkenness which has forced her to
support herself. Further, she alleges
that his conduct has been so con-
temptible that she can no longer live
with him. Gross neglect and extreme
cruelty are again made the basis of
the action. h. e. Sapp is her attor-
ney.
The fourth and final petition was
that of Hazel Hoover, who desires the
severing of her marital ties with
Clarence b. Hoover. March 27, 1907,
was the date on which they were unit
ed and no children were born. Gross
neglect and failure to provide, Thurs
days popular allegations, are made
by the plaintiIf who, in addition, tells
tales of drunkenness when defendant
assaulted her. On one occasion, June
1915, she claims he was so abusive
that she was compelled to leave home
and so to Centerburg. She asks di'
vorce and restoration to maiden name
of Hazel Robertson. Lie. Stillweli Is
her attorney.
Old Case Settled
This week has witnessed the settle