Show Y1J1i MUCH OF U A ci E The Celebrated Divorce Suit of Smith vs Smith C 3UNOMSS ACTS CRUELTY 2Ir Smith Denies Two Hundred Pages of Allegations An Important Decision of the County Court Petitions for the Game Commissioner Com-missioner Appointment aioro Castes Dismissed The contested divorce case of Maggie Smith vs Charles Smith was taken up in the Third district court yesterday The suit was filed on Aug 24 1891 and the plaintiff alleged extreme cruelty as the grounds upon which she prayed for a decree She also alleged that the defendant de-fendant had property valued at 15000 which she had an equity in and asked for an injunction to prevent him from disposing dis-posing of the same Mrs Smith also prayed for temporary alimony during the pendency of the suit and for permanent alimony upon its final adjudication The injunction demanded was issued by Judge Zane and the files have grown since that date until they now contain in the neighborhood neigh-borhood of 200 pages Recently the plaintiff plain-tiff filed supplemental complaint In it she alleges that on Nov 10 1891 the defendant de-fendant on his bended knees implored her to return to him and resume marital relations with him He then promised in the most solemn and emphatic manner that he would never again strike or abuse her or treat her unkindly in any way He also promised to provide a hired girl to do plaintiffs housework She agreed to the proposition but according ac-cording to further allegations the renewed re-newed relations were not as satisfactory as > anticipated The plaintiff alleees that seven days subsequent to the time that she returned to the defendant she had arranged to take a foot bath and the defendant became so enraged that he threw the hot water on the floor and nearly scalded the baby 1 Several days prior to Christmas 1S91 defendant de-fendant was sulky and disagreeable and on Christmas night while at supper he sharpened the carving knife and raised it and glared at the plaintiff in such a fiendish fiend-ish manner that she feared for her life On New Years eve 1891 the defendant refused to hold their sick baby while plaintiff gave it some medicine and became so enraged that he grasped plaintiff plain-tiff by the throat in a savage and brutal manner almost choking her This treatment treat-ment is alleged to have continued uninterruptedly unin-terruptedly until Sept 30 1S92 At that date the ulaiutiff stated that she would rather die than lead such a lifeand the defendant replied sarcastically that she had better get a new rope so that she would not make a muss of it and that he would send home a coffin The defendant denies every allegation of cruelty in the complaint and supple mental complaint me allegations made by Mrs Smith are among the most aggravated ag-gravated that have ever been filed in this court The case was taken up and proceeded with until the hour for adjournment and will be resumed this morning MOONEY VS FARRELL The first case on yesterdays calendar was that of Thomas Mooney vs Kate E Farrell The suit was brought asking for a decree for the sale of certain premises pre-mises and that the proceeds be applied upon the payment of an alleged debt of S11750 for labor and materials furnished in the building of the same The plaintiff plain-tiff alleged that the contract price of the building was 35750 and that the defendant defend-ant had paid him the sum of 550 leaving a balance due of S11750 The defendant denied the material allegations of thecom plaint After hearing the evidence and arguments argu-ments of counsel his honor rendered a judgment in favor of the defendant SHOET ORDERS William C Allen eserutDr vs Heber J Allen demurrer oven ul id and ten days to answer J Newman vs I A Burton order to show cause why injunction should not be granted to restrain sale argued and submitted sub-mitted A B Parker vs John Lines motion to set aside default and vacate judgment submitted sub-mitted Zions Savings Bank and Trust company com-pany vs Daniel H McAllister et al decree de-cree of foreclosure entered for plaintilf by default defaultL C L Huffinan et ale vs Edwin Doust et al motion to retax costs overruled Margaret E Bouck et al vs William Yates et al decree of sale for division of i proceeds Eureka Hill Mining company vs the BullionBeck and California Mining company com-pany thirty days stay to file notice and statement on motion for a new trial M H Coffin vs S A Campbell et al order of withdrawal of summons for further service |