OCR Text |
Show Such Is llic Unlqn: Defense of Chicago I Jan ia An-j An-j ; ' . sfrerjo Suit for Divorce V ' '" j ' '. . . I ,)TT CHICAGO.' ,; Sept,' J. Erring hue-, bands who conW home at 3 . jn, search unsteadily lor an elusive keyhole and then crawl npetalrs on their hands and kneeslest their devotion ,to Bacchus anS Gambrinua cost them a broken home, plucked up courage today when they learned . of the noval contention made by Francis T. Brown, Jr., 1XZJ Hinman avenue. Evanston, In the divorce di-vorce suit brought by his wife. Because hl wife knew of . his weakness weak-ness for intoxicants during his courtship court-ship and never attempted to reform him after marriage, Mr. Bryan set forth, tn the cross bill filed In the Circuit court In his behalf, that Mrs. Bryan's neglect to act as his mentor In things spirituous spirit-uous should bar her from obtaining a divorce. j A cold undemonstrative nature is that of Mrs. Bryan, ' according to her husband. hus-band. While he frankly admits " that the charges tf Intoxication are true. Bryan saya that his wife had 'no feellnr of responsibility for him, and refused to ' follow the suggestions, of his family In 1 dealing with his failings. Bryan eays that although now temperate, he -used intoxicants to excess for years, and appeared before his fiancee under their influence' during their courtship. He denies his wife's assertion that the habit took hold of him after marriage. mar-riage. He asserts that she so far forgot for-got her duty to him as to. use intoxicating intoxicat-ing liquor herself in his 'presence, well knowing the probable effect upon him. v Bryan -ays that his reform began ' when he parted from his wife - four years ago in 8t. Louis, where he was engaged in the insurance business. He asserts that .she has refused to return td him as promised. Last April Bryan filed a suit against his wife on the charge of desertion. Mr. Bryan's cross bill charged habitual drunkenness. |