The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1921-07-27
ASK FOR DIVORCE
Frank and Tillie Hardesty
Again Before Court.
property Said To Be Valued at
One-FOurth Million.

Ihat the dove of peace has not yet
descended to soothe the matrimonial
troubles and domestic as well as fl
nahclai difficulties of Frank and TilIie
I1droesty was shown. today. when Mrs.
dardesty filed suit with the clerk Of
the shawnee county district court ask
ing Tor a decree of divorce and divi-
sion or their property which consists
largely OF Usage county land and
which the plaintiffs petition states is
worth approximately one-fourth mill
lion dollars.
Several Suits Filed.
The trials and tribulations of the
Hardesty family have been before the
general public for the past seven years
curing which time several suits have
been filed and much of the evidence
produced In the different trials was
largely of a sensational nature. Ao-
cording to the petition in the case
Iiled, today, by Mrs. Hardesty, she
1lfst brought suit in 1914 for a separ-
ate maintenance which she states was
granted in 1915. Later she brought
suit for damages against Mrs Cora
harris, 1885 Van Buren, street. charg-
ing that Mrs Harris had alienated her
husbands affections. The petition also
SHOWS that in June. 1917. Hardesty
went to Reno. Nevada. where he filed
suit Tor a divorce. and that later. in
132O, he filed a similar suit in Usage
county. This latter action was dis
missed, so the petition filed, today
states, when Mrs. Hardesty filed a
cross petition in which It was charged
that Hardesty had had improper re-
hat!ons with Mrs Harris whose name
appears all thru the petition as hav-
ing been responsible for a large share
of the troubles in the Hardesty family.
Still more recent was the sensational
case filed in district court by Helen
Maud Harris, 15-year-old daughter of
Mrs. Cora Harris. asking for $4,000
domages from Hardesty. charging him
with alternating her mothers affec-
fions. This action however, was
thrown out of court, June 81, by Judge
George II. Whitcomb who held that
the petition did not contain a cause of
action.
Charged With Cruelty.
In the petition filed. today, Mrs
Harde5ty charges her husband with
extreme cruelty. gross neglect of duty
end with having had improper rela-
tfons with Mrs. Harris. She includes a
general review of the cases brought
heretofore. and of the charges made,
Inc petition covering several pages.
The principal allegation is that in
1919 Hardesty became infatuated with
Mrs. Harris and that an improper re-
Eationship between the two has ex-
1Stcd ever since. 1t is alleged that
I-ardesty remained away from home
rum one TO three months at n time
and that he kept a picture of Mrs.
Harris on his dresser in his bed room
at home
During the period from 1912 to
1917, when Mrs. Hardesty brought
suit for separate maintenance. it is
alleged that the conduct of Hardesty
and Mrs. Harris was open and motor
ious. Turing the trial of the suit for
a separate maintenance it is alleged
that Hardesty accompanied Mrs. Har-
ris to the court house each day. 1t is
alsotcharged that when Hardesty went
TO Nevada to file his suit for a divorce
in 1917 that Mrs. Harris followed him
and that the two lived together as
man and wife at different places in
California The suit which Helen
Maud Harris brought against Har-
desty for $4,000 damages is not men
toned in Mrs. Hardesty's petition.
Lands Valued at $4,000.
The propert.- and real estate which
Mrs. Hardest asks be divided, and
that she be awarded one-half, is said
to consist of Usage county land worth
S240,000. an equity in other lands
worth $4,000, twenty-five shares of
stock in the First National bank of
Overlook, Kan, worth $4,000, and
other property worth $4,000