Putnam patriot., 1926-02-05
FIVE OF SEVEN ARE
 GRANTED DEGREES
DIVORCE CASES INCLUDE ALL SORTS OF GRoUNDs- HUSBAND SORROWS FROM WIFE ON WEDDING
 TRIP.-WIFE THREATENS DEATH
Detective Locates Husband Missing Nineteen Years-Drink
 Costs One Wife 1000.

Both men and women were among the seven petitioners for divorce de- crees at special short calendar ses- sion of the Superior court held in Putnam. Monday afternoon at two O. clock. Judge Edwin C. Dickenson of Hartford presiding. Five of the sev- en petitions were granted, one was taken under advisement, and further evidence was requested in another.
 Left With Whole Skin
 The first case heard was that of Sylvester Tarbox vs. Carrie May Tar box. Mir. Tarbox testified that they were married April Il, 1914. They re- moved to rlainfeld. where family troubles arose on account of Mrs. Tar box, somewhat older than her hus- band becoming jealous of him. He went back and forth to work in his brothers automobile, and a woman employe in the same mill was carried in the machine.
 This caused Mrs Tarhox to become green-eyed. and she not only threat ened to cut the tires on the machine with butcher knife, but she threat ened to do away with her husband
 Tarbox told the court that one morning she left the house taking a revolver with her. It had but one shell in it. but when she returned 1t contained two. As soon as she enter ed the house his brother jumped for the travelling bag Mrs. Tarbox was carrying it. opened it, took out the revolver and hid it. His wife had several times threatened to fill him full of lead Fearing for his life and with the advice of his wife's father, he left home, not wishing to wake up dead" as his wife had threatened he would. He said that his wife's father told him to get out while his skin was whole.
 A brother of Mrs. Tarbox and q relative of Mir. Tarbox corroberated the testimony of plaintiff and said they thought that Mrs. Tarbox was equal to carrying out her threats when she was mad Decision was reserved.
 Didn't Know Why
 Nettie F. Burton. who asked for q decree from her husband, James, on the ground of desertion. said that her husband left her August i3, 1921, in Sterling. Close questioning could not bring from the witness any reason as to why her husband left. The court said Co her. Madame. you must know of some reason why your husband left YOU" Mrs. Burton said that she did not. and two boarders at her house. who testified that Burton left, and had not lived with Mrs. Burton for three years. also failed to disclose any luawledge as tn why the husband went away. The court said the case could he continued Co the March term for further evidence.
 Other Women
 Florence F. Stephens of Williman- tie charged her husband. Edward L. Stephens. with infdelitv. He said that he had admitted his attentions to other women and she upbraided him for 1t and he promised to do bet ter but became worse than ever. Her husband at the time was a member of the state police, she said.
 Another witness was introduced wfo also testified that Stephens had boast ed of his relations with other women. The decree was granted on statutory grounds. Mrs. Stephens was also granted the custody of a nine year old child.
 Cost Her s3.o00
 Gertrude W Tewgood of Daniel son was granted decree from Henry Tewgood on the ground of habitual intemperance. Mrs. fewgood said