Auburn Courier                                                                                             Order Book 44	October 18, 1909                                                                                             December Term 1909 Page 155, 175	Aldrich, Anna C	Aldrich, James	A rather sensational divorce complaint has been filed in the DeKalb Circuit court, in which Anna C. Aldrich asks legal separation from her husband, James Aldrich and alimony in the sum of $500. The complaint avers that they were married February 8, 1903 and lived together until July, 1907; that in consequence of the cruel treatment she received from the defendant she was then obliged to separate from him. She further states that by a former marriage the plaintiff had a family of children whom Aldrich promised to support, and that subsequently to their marriage the defendant failed to support either the children or herself and she has compelled to work out to secure funds with which to provide food and shelter. She charges that in July, 1907, the defendant without cause or justification assaulted her five-year-old son and kicked him across the room. And when she remonstrated he assaulted and choked the plaintiff. He then left the home and has not returned, Mrs. Aldrich prays for a separation, a reasonable monthly allowance and alimony of $500. Case 8632 Page 175 Defendant notified in the Auburn Dispatch and is in default. Court trial finds for the Plaintiff and she is given the care and custody of Berdenia Aldrich (5 years old)
Order Book 44	October Term 1909 Page 32	Baker, Alice A.	Baker, Aaron S.	Case 8602 Divorce granted to the Plaintiff.
Order Book 44       Auburn Courier	October Term 1909 Page 83     November 1, 1909	Bontrager, Clara	Bontrager, John F.	Divorce granted to the Plaintiff and she is to resume her former name of Clara Carter. Paper States: "Mrs. Clara Bontrager was granted a divorce from her husband Thursday evening by Judge Bratton after the submission of some testimony which was uncontradicted. The defendant did not appear in court, hence the decree was easily secured. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant had a violent and uncontrollable temper that he cursed her, ordered her, to leave the home on September firs, informing her, that he would no longer support her. She asked that the marriage bonds be annulled and her maiden name Clara Carter restored, both of which were granted by the court
Order Book 44	May Term 1910 Page 476	Bordner, Esther	Bordner, Charles S.	Case 8556 Case was set for trial and the plaintiff did not appear. Case dismissed at Plaintiff’s cost.
Order Book 44	May Term 1910 Page 467, 468	Bowman, Ray K.	Bowman, Grace	Case 8818 Witnesses for the Plaintiff were: Archie S. Bowman and Charles E. Miser. Plaintiff granted a divorce and defendant’s name changed to Grace Brown. There is a marriage in DeKalb County for a Ray K. Bowman age 26 born in Adamsville, MI. He was a farmer and was born to Archie S. & Alice (Kelley) Bowman. He married Grace E. Braun Age 24 born in Waterloo, IN to George A & Elizabeth (Henney) Braun. They were married March 24, 1910 in Waterloo, IN
Order Book 44           Auburn Courier	December Term 1909 Page 250, 255, 256       January 27, 1910	Boyle, Alma C.	Boyle, William D.	Page 255, 256 Defendant in default. Divorce granted to the Plaintiff and custody of Ethel Maria Boyle. Alma C. Boyle, by her attorney, has filed a suit in the DeKalb circuit court demanding legal separation from her husband William D. Boyle, in which she makes some ugly charges. The complaint states that she and the defendant were united in marriage January 8, 1878, and that they had lived together as man and wife until December, 1909, that during their married life and particularly during the last year thereof the plaintiff has struck her violently with his fists and open hands, that he has told her that she was no good to him anymore and she could take her traps and leave his house. His treatment she alleges has been cruel and inhuman. The plaintiff asks for an absolute divorce decree and the custody of her daughter Ethel, claiming in the compliant that the defendant is not a fit person to have the custody of the girl. NO alimony is asked for.
Order Book 44 See also Order Book 43	October Term 1909 Page 31, 32	Brogan, Edna M.	Brogan, Frank J or P.	Case 8599 Defendant notified of action by notice published in the Auburn Courier. Defendant in default. Edna May Brogan granted the divorce and she is to resume her former name of Edna May Quince. In DeKalb County marriages there is a marriage for a Frank P Borgan age 25 born in Deliat, MI he was a B. & O Railroad fireman. His parents were: John & Ella (Wilkenson) Brogan. He Married Edna M. Quince age 20 who was born in Garrett, IN to Ad. & Dray (Hathaway) Quince. They were married April 25, 1906 in Auburn, IN.
Order Book 44                                                                   Auburn Courier	March Term 1910 Page 344, 358, 359                                                                 March 24,1910	Bryant, James M                                                                   Carrie M. Bryant	Bryant, ? W                                                                   James W. Bryant	Page 358, 359 Divorce & Custody of Child. Divorce granted to Plaintiff and Plaintiff to have custody of Hilda Bryant who is 6 years of age. Defendant to pay for education ad maintenance of said child until 16 years of age. Note: This may not be the same individuals. In DeKalb County Marriages there is a marriage for a J. M. Bryant, age 24 born in Butler, IN He was a painter. His parents were James & Margaret Campbell) Bryant. He married Carrie Van Auken age 20 who was born at Pleasant Lake, In to Calvin E. and Mary E. (Pixley) VanAuken. They were married December 8, 1901 in Garrett, IN. Note this makes more sense than the above plaintiff and defendant: Paper states The divorce case of Carrie M. Bryant vs. James W. Bryant was tried before the judge this morning and after hearing the evidence a decree was granted to the plaintiff and the defendant was ordered to pa to Mrs. Bryant the sum of five dollars per month for the maintenance of the child. The plaintiff charged failure to provide as reason for wanting legal separation.
Order Book 44               Auburn Courier	May Term 1910 Page 506             June 2, 1910                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     June 9, 1910	Casebeer, Beulah M.	Casebeer, Joseph H.	Divorce & Change of Name. Court finds for the Plaintiff and divorce is granted. Plaintiff to resume former name of Beulah M. Borst. Defendant to pay all costs. Paper States: Her feelings wounded by continued abuse, and fearful that her husband would at any time inflict violent injury upon her, if to murder her, Mrs. Beulah Casebeer by her attorney J. E. Pomeroy has filed a complaint in the circuit curt, asking that she be granted legal separation from J. H. Casebeer and that her maiden name Beulah Borst, be restored. Recited in the complaint ar the following facts and allegations: the couple were married April 23, 1909, and separated on May 21, 1910. That soon after the marriage the defendant began a course of studied cruelty upon the plaintiff: that the plaintiff is a graduate from the Buchtel college at Akron, Ohio, and has taken special music training and that she has affiliated with the very best people. The defendant persistently objected to her associating with her friends and he incurred without reason a bitter hatred for her parent’s He refused to allow her parents to visit her and would not permit her to visit her parent’s Prior to their marriage the defendant represented to the plaintiff that he had a good real estate business, a good bank account and a flourishing business. After the marriage he took the plaintiff to the home of his mother discharged the servant who had done the work about the house and assigned the plaintiff to do the work, which had been performed, by the servant. In October, 1909, after the defendant threatened to leave the plaintiff and sorely abused her, she left him and went to the home of her parents. Thereafter he importuned her return, making all kinds of promises, representing to her that he had purchased a property for them to live in, when in fact, his brother had purchased the property. At times he has been kind, when suddenly he would fly into violent fits of anger and would sear, so conducting himself as to lead the plaintiff to believe that he is an habitual user of violent drugs, the nature of which is to the plaintiff unknown. On last Saturday the Plaintiff accompanied her father to Fort Wayne to consult a specialist and returned at four o’clock in the afternoon. The defendant came home at about nine thirty o’clock and was drunk. He threatened to kill her and both her parents and ordered her to leave the house. When she attempted to do so, he violently compelled her to return to bed. He then proposed that they both commit suicide and said he would show her how to do it. The plaintiff escaped from the house, fled to the home of a neighbor and telephoned the sheriff, who came to the scene. Mrs. Casebeer prays the court for a decree, the restoration of her maiden name and all other proper relief. If guilty of such actions as described above, the defendant will have reason to be thankful if he escapes amore severe punishment than the severance of matrimonial ties. That a husband would treat his wife in such a manner is indeed awful to contemplate Paper States: Mrs. Beulah Casebeer, who recently filed a rather sensational divorce complaint in the circuit court against J. H. Casebeer the real estate man, appeared before Judge Bratton Saturday and secured a decree. The defendant did not appear to enter denial to ay of the charges and no difficulty whatever was experienced in securing the legal separation. The charges, which were uncontradicted were of a nature that warranted a hasty decision in favor of the plaintiff, and together with the decree she was given her maiden name. Miss Beulah Borst. No alimony was asked, and the decree was a plaint one with all proper belief. The Plaintiff has taken up her abode with her parents, where she will reside hereafter. In DeKalb County Marriages there is a marriage for a Joseph H. Casebeer age 40 born in Williams County, Ohio. He was a real Estate agent. His Parents were Enos L. and Nannie J. (Martin) Casebeer. He married Beulah M. Borst, age 35 born in Wadsworth, OH to Addison A. & Mary A. (Seigley) Borst. They were married April 23, 1909 in Auburn, IN
Order Book 44                                             Auburn Courier	December Term 1909 Page 272, 273                                           January 13, 1910                                                                             February 10, 1910	Clark, Elmer D.	Clark, Jane C.	Defendant in default. Divorce granted to the Plaintiff with him paying all costs. In DeKalb County Marriages there is a marriage for an Elmer D. Clark age 21 born in Garret and he worked as a machinist. His parents were Jefferson & Dorothy (Cochran) Clark. He married Jane Carrie Whetschell age 18 born in Garrett to John F. & Ella (Catlin) Whetschell. They were married December 31, 1902 in Garrett. Paper states: That she did not love him any more, that she was cruel and inhuman in her treatment toward him, that she abandoned him and many times stated that she was sorry she married him are the charges made against Jane C. Clark of Garrett, by her husband in an effort to obtain a divorce decree. The complaint recites the fact that they were happily wedded in the cold month of December, 1902 and that things had been tolerably cold ever since in the love line, the wife refusing to give him the affection the marriage contract called for. The couple separated in December this year (note must have been December 1909) and have not since lived together. Mr. Clark asks for a plain decree from Jane and nothing more. The case will come up for trail in the near future Paper states: Elmer D. Clark, resident of Garrett and employee of the McIntyre Company appeared in court Friday morning, where after the submission of testimony he was granted a divorce decree from his wife, Jane C. Clark. Mr. Clark testified that his wife had repeatedly told him during the past six years that she ha no love for him whatever. The couple separated first in June 1902, but began living together again a few months later.
Order Book 44	December Term 1909 Page 254,       May Term 1910 Page 445	Collett, Jonathan	Collett, ?         Collett, Margaret	Case 8545 Plaintiff files motion to retax costs. (This is a former divorce case),   Page 445 Case 8461 Motion to retax costs is dismissed. In DeKalb County Marriages there is a marriage for a Jonathan Peter Collett, age 31 born in Greenville, OH Living in St. Marys, OH. He was a dentist. His parents were Henry & ? (Deardoff) Collett. He married Margaret May Ford age 21 born in Auburn to Thomas & Sarah (Lewis) Ford. They were married June 14, 1899 in Auburn, IN.
Order Book 44                           Auburn Courier	May Term 1910 Page 448, 512                         February 10, 1910                             June 16, 1910	Caves, Sarah A.	Caves, William H.	Case 8718 Defendant notified by publishing in the local newspaper. Defendant in default. Page 512 Notice was filed in the Auburn Dispatch. Court finds for the plaintiff that she is entitled to a divorce and her name change to Sarah A. Baltz. Plaintiff to pay all costs. Paper States: Sarah Caves is the plaintiff in a divorce action filed today in the court in which she demands separation form her husband, William A? Caves. The complainant recites the fact that they were wedded August 31, 1894 and lived together until 1898. A plain decree is asked. Evidence in the case of Sarah A. Caves versus W. H. Caves, divorce, was introduced this morning and a decree was granted as prayed for. The maiden name, Sarah A. Baltz, was also restored.
Order Book 44                 Auburn Courier	May Term 1910 Page 517,.518, 564               April 21, 1910	Crane, Olive	Crane, Ralph	Case 8790 Notice filed in local newspaper and defendant in default. Page 564 Divorce granted to the Plaintiff and to resume her maiden name Olive Ogden. Paper States: By her attorney, C. M. Brown, Mrs. Olive Crane today filed a suit in the circuit court asking for legal separation from her husband, Ralph Crane. The usual charges of failure to provide and cruel and inhuman treatment are made.
Order Book 44                   Auburn Courier	December Term 1909, Page 147, 148, March Term 1910 Page 317, 383             December 23, 1909                                                     February 10, 1910                             March 10, 1910                   April 7, 1910	Culbertson, Iva	Culbertson, Ivan	The Court dismisses case 8661 Cause without prejudice. Page 317 Files a general denial. Page 383 Divorce granted to the Plaintiff and she is to resume her former name of Iva Miller The case entitled Ivan Culbertson vs. Ira Culbertson came up before Judge Bratton Monday afternoon and after taking evidence his honor refused to grant the decree for the reason that he had no jurisdiction. The parents of the prosecutirx resides in Allen County and inasmuch as she is a minor, the judge gives as his opinion that she must apply in the Allen Circuit court. In the complaint the plaintiff alleges inhuman treatment and other usual charges. ?She will make application for a divorce in Allen county, it is stated. Paper States: Iva Culbertson has refilled her divorce complaint asking for separation from her husband. Ivan Culbertson She charges inhuman and cruel treatment and everything else almost on the calendar. The case was filed before but discharged at the plaintiff’s cost without prejudice. Paper states: In the divorce proceedings against Ivan Culbertson by his wife, Iva Culberston, the defendant by his attorney, H. K. Hartman, has filed a general denial to each and every allegation. Paper states: The divorce case of Iva Culbertson vs. Ivan Culbertson was tried this morning and the plaintiff was granted a decree at the defendant’s costs and her maiden name Iva Miller, was restored.
Order Book 44                   Auburn Courier	May Term 1910 Page 534                 June 23, 1910	Curtis, Ettie (Etta)	Curtis, Charles L.	Case 8781 Defendant in default and court finds for the Plaintiff. She is to have custody of LuLu Curtis until further orders with the Defendant having visiting orders within reasonable hours. Paper States: Etta Curtis of Altoona told Judge Bratton this morning while on the witness stand that her "hubby," Charles Curtis took to his bosom another woman and propelled his anatomy to parts unknown; that during their wedded life he had broken her smelling member, choked her, cursed her and many other things in the conventional divorce menu. That she had four children, etc. and the Judge up and granted her a decree and gave her the custody of the children. If Charles is located he might get a good shaking, if not be arrested on the charge of wife desertion. In DeKalb County marriages there is a marriage for an Etta Funk Curtis to a Henry J. Ringenberg in March 6, 1915. Etta was 44 born in Defiance, Ohio and 1 previous marriage to a Curtis. Her parents were Henry & Alice (Nolen) Funk. Henry J. Ringenberg was born in Kosciusko Co. IN. There was a mention in the marriage records of an Ernest G. Curtis, whose parents were Charles L & Etta (Funk) Curtis. There marriage took place in 1913.
Order Book 44                       Auburn Courier	October Term 1909 Page 15 May Term 1910 Page 513                   June 16, 1910	Davidson, Emma	Davidson, Harry D	Case 8569 Case dismissed at Plaintiff’s costs. Page 513 There is a divorce for Emma vs. Harvey This is about June 7, 1910. Case 8795 Divorce granted to Plaintiff and custody of Gladys Davidson, age 13 yeas and Madge Davidson aged 10 years. Paper States: The divorce case of Emma Davidson versus Harry Davidson was heard this morning and the matter taken under advisement by the court. There is a DeKalb County Marriage for a Harvey Davidson age 22 born in DeKalb Co In 1 previous marriage . He was a B. & O Laborer. His parents wee Joseph & Rachel (Gentleapire) Davidson. He married Emma Sallenberger, age 22 born in Indiana to Jacob & Mary (Brumbalgh) Sallenberger, age 22. They were married June 28, 1896 at K. F. Fairs, Residence.
Order Book 44     Auburn Courier	March Term 1910 Page 369   March 10, 1910	Dycus, Thomas	Dycus, Martha	Defendant in default. Divorce granted to the Plaintiff. Paper states: Thomas F. Dycus is the plaintiff in a divorce case instituted against his wife, Marietta, The complaint recites the fact, that the couple were intermarried November 27, 1896, and lived together as man and wife until October 3, 1909, on which day he found his better half in company with one Henry Lowe, an immoral man. She never returned to his household thereafter, hence the plaintiff asks that the bonds of matrimony be severed.
Auburn Courier	December 23, 1909	Everetts, Mary	Everetts, Charles M.	Another divorce action was begun Monday with the filing of a bill by Mrs. Mary Everetts against Charles M. Everetts, in which cruel and inhuman treatment is alleged The bill further sets out as a complaint the charge that her husband called her bad names and cursed her, threatened her and even struck her, causing her to fear for herself and children, Mrs. Everetts also declares that her husband failed to provide for his family and that she was thrown upon her own resources for the support of herself and children. Two children are the fruits of their union, who are Gerald aged 6 and Lyston aged 3 Mrs. Everetts is asking for the custody of the youngest child, Lyston and makes the statement that the parents of her husband have offered to take the older child into their home. The Everetts married on November 1, 1902 and separated December 17, this year. Their home is in this county. There is a DeKalb County Marriage record for a Charles M. Everett age 20 born in Butler, IN and was a farmer. His parents were Cyrus & Addie (McCurty) Everett. He married Mary Crouse age 19 born in Summit, Steuben Co. IN to John & Harriet (Houghs) Crouse. They were married October 1, 1902 at the Lutheran Parsonage.
Order Book 44	December Term 1909 Page 155, May Term 1910 Page 475	Fee, John	Fee, Martha E.	Case 8570 Defendant three times called and is in default. Page 475 Plaintiff did not appear and case dismissed at Plaintiff’s expense. There is a DeKalb County Marriage for a John W. Fee age 40 born in Sidney, Ohio living in Defiance Co, Ohio. A farmer. 1 Previous Marriage. His parents were Amos & S. A. (Richards) Fee. He married Martha E. Bauer, age 51 born in Allen Co, IN She had 3 previous marriages, and Last name was Shaffer. Her parents were Marvin & Luphasia (Story) Bauer. They were married May 8, 1906 in Auburn, IN.
Order Book 44                                   Auburn Courier	March Term 1910 Page 367, 396, 397                                 March 10, 1910	Fogel, Elizabeth	Fogel, Frank	Case 8757 Page 396, 397 Divorce granted and the plaintiff to have custody of Clarence Fogel age 20 years and Kenneth Alfred Fogel age 3 years. Defendant to pay $8 per month for the support of the children until they reach the age of !6 years. In the Recorder’s Office Deed Book 79 page 239 there is a Deed where William Deeds land to Margaret. Paper states; Elizabeth Fogel prays the court for separation from her husband Frank Fogel. She charges abandonment and the usual trimmings and asks $500 alimony and payment of $100 per annum for the support of her children.
Order Book 44	March Term 1910 Page 421	Frederick ?	Frederick ?	Cause is dismissed at her (Plaintiff’s) costs.
Order Book 44                                     Auburn Courier	March Term 1910 Page 320, 343, 421, 427, 437                                 March 3, 1910                                                                                                                                                                                   April 21, 1910                                                   May 4, 1910	Frick, Margaret	Frick, William	Case 8750 Page 343 Attorney appears for the defendant. Page 421 Plaintiff files a motion for allowance & Support pending the trial. Page 427 Case continued. Page 437 Plaintiff granted divorce. The minor child Effie G. Frick, age 9 years is to be taken from each of the parties and made a ward of the court to be placed with a public or charitable institution.   Paper states: Mrs. Margaret Frick, by her attorney, George W. Crooks, has instituted divorce proceedings in the circuit court against her husband, William Frick, for the second item during the past two years. She demands legal separation together with alimony in the amount of $800. and the payment of $100 annually. The plaintiff avers that during the past four years the defendant has been guilty of cruel and inhuman treatment, that he has knocked her down, reached for a gun when she returned from church, threatened to kill her with an axe, that he has been an habitual drunkard and everything else on the program. The complaint recites the fact that the couple were married July 22, 1898, and that they separated in November 1909. The plaintiff sought a divorce two years ago and the matter was to be submitted to the court for trial when the defendant begged and promised that he would be good. The case was then dismissed.   There is a DeKalb County Marriage for a William Frick age 35 born in DeKalb Co In 1 previous marriage. He was a railroad worker and His Parents were John & Lydia (Gingery) Frick. He married Margaret L. Servers age 41 born in Defiance Co, OH she had 3 previous marriages. Her Parents were Samuel & Mary E. (Fretz) Servers. He was married November 10, 1898 in Butler, IN. In September 29, 1910 there is a marriage for a William Frick born in Waterloo with 1 previous marriage, his parents were John and Lydia (Frick ) Frick He married Margaret Seevers, age 51 born in Defiance Co. O. to Samuel & Mary (Seevers) Seevers) They were married September 29, 1910 in Auburn, IN. Paper states: Margaret Frick was this morning granted legal separation from her husband William Frick, given the custody of her child and alimony in a eat sum. The case was filed some time ago and attorneys for both sides after negotiations settled on the alimony. By the terms of the agreement all the real estate and personal property is conveyed to Mrs. Frick and she is to pay t=o the defendant four hundred dollars in cash. The interested parties reside two miles east of Waterloo. Paper States: Mrs. William Frick who recently sought for and was granted a divorce decree from her husband, and who by an agreement out of court, was to give her husband the sum of four hundred dollars and for her alimony retain the farm the couple have lived upon, was in the city today making loud protestations claiming that Mr. Frick had taken a mowing machine, harrow, quantity of corn, pillow slips, sheets and other articles which were, by virtue of the agreement her property. She threatens to bring suit against her divorced husband in which she will charge him with having taken the above-mentioned articles. The woman displayed a militant sprit and claims that she will make things warm for William, and probably her attorney
Order Book 44                 Auburn Courier	May Term 1910 Page 449, 489, 490               March 10, 1910	Frost, Emma	Frost, Fred	Case 8754 Notice published in the local newspaper and defendant is in default Page 489, 490 Court rules for the Plaintiff and she is to have custody of Evelyn Mae Frost Papers states: Emma Frost has by her attorney, filed a suit in the circuit court against her husband, Fred Frost, asking that she be granted legal separation together with alimony in the sum of $300 and $250 per annum for the support of her child. Failure to provide is the principal charge. In DeKalb County Marriages there is a marriage for a R. F. Frost, age 18 born in Grand Rapids, Michigan. He was a laborer. His parents were R. F. & Margrette (Martin, Frost Sr. He married Emma Alice Sapp, age 17 born in Garrett to John and Ana (Hutker) Sapp married May 7, 1907 in Garrett.
Order Book 44	October Term 1909 Page 33	Gengler, Sarah L.	Gengler, Peter A.	Case 8605 Divorce granted to the Plaintiff. To receive $100 alimony and to resume her former name of Sarah L. Hurd
Auburn Courier	January 13, 1910	Gratts, ?	Gratts, Jacob	Paper States: Sheriff Thomas received a telephone call this noon from Jacob Gratts, living south of the city, notifying him that two men had stolen as many loads of hay from the premises and started for town with it. The officer at once made a search for the parties wanted and found the hay in the south part of the city. He waited until the men returned to the wagons and was informed by them that the wife of Mr. Gratts had applied for a divorce in the Allen county court and that she had caused to be issued a restraining order preventing him from disposing of any of his property. The men also stated that the attorney of Mr. Gratts had told her that she could dispose of the hay and appropriate the money in paying her expenses. Mr. Gratts thought the wife had no right to sell the hay because he was restrained from so doing. He started for Fort Wayne at once to consult his lawyer in regard to the matte. NO arrest were made.
Auburn Courier	June 9, 1910	Haite, George	Haite, Cora	Paper States: George Haite of Franklin township, who recently was arrested in Fort Wayne on a charge preferred by his wife, alleging that he committed the crime of assault and battery with intent to commit murder, and who was discharged by Police Judge Mungovan, has brought suit in the circuit court by his attorney, W. H. Leas, asking that the bonds of matrimony be severed. The plaintiff asserts that the marriage was a fraudulent one in that the defendant represented to him that she was a woman of chastity, when in fact she had lived in adultery with a man named Niswander prior to their marriage and without the knowledge of the Plaintiff. The parties were intermarried on April 9th, this year and Mr. Haite claims that the ceremony was procured by fraud. After the marriage, the complainant avers the defendant held secret meetings with other men. A plain decree, with all proper relief is asked.
Order Book 44	December Term 1909 Page 186 May Term 1910 Page 447	Hart, Ray	Hart, Ida M.	Case 8612 defendant files a general denial. Page 447 Plaintiff dismisses the cause at his costs.
Order Book 44	December Term 1909 Page 169, 170	Hevel, Earl	Hevel, Margarete	Case 8607 Notice of Non Resident of defendant published in the Auburn Dispatch. Defendant in default. Divorce granted to the Plaintiff by the Court.
Order Book 44   Auburn Courier	March Term 1910 Page 319 February 23, 1910	Hipskin, Mary   Hipshire, May	Hipskin, James H.   Hipshire, James H.	Case 8745 Divorce Alimony Please note spellings: "Divorce proceedings were filed in the circuit court this afternoon in which Mrs. May Hipshire, of Garrett is the plaintiff, and James H. Hipshire is the defendant. The complaint recites the fact that the couple were married November 17th, 1904 and that they lived together until February 17, 1910, at which time they separated and have not lived together as man and wife since. The plaintiff charges that during the pat thee years the defendant has been guilty of cruel and inhuman treatment toward her that he struck her in the face at one time when she asked him for money with which to buy provisions, that he has been an habitual drunkard and he is one now. Mrs. Hipshire asks that the custody of the year old child be given to her and that the defendant be compelled to pay into court the sum of fifty dollars per annum for the support of the child.
Auburn Courier	July 7, 1910
Order Book 44	October Term 1909 Page 129	Hollibaugh, Luella	Hollibaugh, Edward C.	It is adjudged by the Court that the Plaintiff is not entitled to a divorce from the defendant.
Auburn Courier                                                         Order Book 44	October 18, 1909                                                         October Term 1909 Page 70, 90, 91	Kist, William G	Kist, Hattie	William G. Kist, one of the proprietors of the Garret Daily Press, has begun a suit in circuit court in which he prays for a legal separation from his wife Hattie Kist. The complaint sets for the fact that the parties were married May 25, 1896 and lived together until January 25, 1905; the defendant without cause or justification, against the will of the plaintiff wholly abandoned him and has not since returned. He therefore deems himself worthy of a decree. It is not thought that the defendant will appear and the divorce will probably be granted by default. Attorney for defendant files for an allowance. Page 90, 91 Plaintiff withdraws her motion & application for allowance. Court finds for the Plaintiff that she is granted a divorce and is entitled to resume her former name of Hattie E. Cretchen.
Auburn Courier	March 24, 1910                                                                                                                                                                                                                               March 31, 1910	Krauss, William R.	Krauss, Rae	Paper States: With a courtroom packed to the doors with spectators, the opposing counsel on the Krauss divorce case are fighting a strenuous legal battle. William R. Krauss, the plaintiff was on the witness stand Wednesday and today at the witness of the defense. J. A. Hindman, representing Mrs. Rae Krauss, put the husband on the stand as a witness for the defense, having declined to cross question him is a witness for the plaintiff’s side of the case. Krauss almost broke down today when he told of his daughter’s death. He wept as he gave his testimony. In its anxiety to catch every word the crowd in the courtroom surged forward to the rail separating the bar from the auditorium and at times Sheriff George and his deputies were compelled to clear the space about the jury box and the place where the principals sat. The crowd consisted of men and women. At one time Judge Elliott was compelled to ask the attorneys to wait until a woman could remove a crying baby from the courtroom. Mrs. Rae M. Krauss, the defendant talked at times with her father Dr. Anderman, while her husband was on the witness stand. They were apparently discussing what Krauss said Mrs. Kraus showed the keenest interest throughout the progress of the trial. Her lawyers promised she shall tell t the court all she knows about the death of Crystal Krauss, her stepdaughter who according to her own confession, she murdered and regarding whose death she now charges her husband, the father of Crystal with being the principal in a cross-complaint filed in the divorce suite now being tried. It is believed she will be placed on the stand soon after Krauss has finished his testimony, in an effort to refute what he has said while his testimony is still fresh in the minds of the jurors. The diligence of Miss Mary Allison, the officer of the Indiana Women’s prison is causing much favorable comment. Mrs. Krauss appeared in the courtroom attired in a white shirtwaist in direct contrast with the solid black of her attire during the two preceding days. She sill wears the black hat, which is not removed, in the courtroom. Paper states: "Marion Jury Exonerated Krauss from Murder) The jury in the Krauss divorce case returned a verdict at 10:30 Saturday night after eight hours of deliberation. The verdict on orders of Judge Elliot was not read until court convened at 10 o’clock Monday morning. The result of the jury’s finding is only advisory to the court and while there is still some doubt as t the result, it is still some doubt as to the result it is believed that from the answers to the six questions propounded to the jury and answers returned that the intention of that body was the refusal of a divorce and it is believed that Judge Elliot will hold that way when he renders his decision, though he did not say so. In other words Krauss will be exonerated from any part in the murder of his daughter Crystal, but will be denied the decree because he knew she was the murderess by her confession. Judge Elliot asked the attorneys if they cared to argue further ad Mr. Burns for the plaintiff and Mr. Hindman for the defendant both replied that they wish to make some motion and to argue same before judgment is rendered. (Note there is more to the article)
Order Book 44                 Auburn Courier	March Term 1910 Page 354, 387, 388               March 24, 1910	Krontz, Flossie	Krontz, John H.W.	Case 8768 Divorce Page 387, 388 John Krontz gives a general denial. Court finds that Plaintiff if entitled to a divorce and to resume her former name of Flossie Freeburn. Papers states: Flossie Krontz, of Butler, has begun proceedings by her attorney, E. B. Dunten, in court for legal separation from her husband, John. H. W. Krontz, and she demands alimony in the sum of $1,000 together with the restoration of her maiden name. Flossie Freeborn. She charges that both the defendant and his parents have abused her and have falsely charged her with committing the crime of adultery.
Order Book 44                                                   Auburn Courier	December Term 1909 Page 185, 187, 190, 194, 197, 261                                               January 6, 1910                                                                                                                                                                     January 13, 1910                                                                                                                                                                                                                   February 3, 1910                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             March 10, 1910	Lahnum, Emma J.	Lahnum, William	Case 8684 Plaintiff asks for divorce and a restraining order against the defendant. Court granted a restraining order as prayed and the defendant Wm. Lahnum is restrained from selling or otherwise disposing of the real estate and personal property. Page 187 Case continued. Page 190 Case continued. Page 194 Cause submitted to the Court for trial. Page 197 Case continued. Page 261 Divorce granted to the plaintiff with $150 alimony and she is entitled to resume her former name of Emma J. Outland Paper States: Thrice wedded, twice separated and an applicant for legal separation together with alimony and the restoration of her maiden name at the present time, is the record of Mrs. Emma J. Lahman of North of the city, as set forth in a divorce complaint filed in the circuit court last Saturday. The plaintiff pictures a yawning gulf of despair and persecution in her complaint, charging her husband William Lahman, with having done most everything on the calendar that is unbearable by a woman. She alleges that after her marriage the defendant induced her to lend him eleven hundred dollars, that he called her vile names, failed to support her and her children, that he has struck her in the mouth and face with his fist, that he has charged her with living in adultery with him, for the reason that his church did not recognizes separations, etc. The complaint states that her first husband, was convicted in the federal courts of a notorious crime and that she was granted separation form him in 1888. that she was subsequently married to John W. Outland, who died in 1901; that she had four children form each of these marriage and that William Lahman well knew these circumstances at the time of their marriage. Mrs. Lahman also states in her complaint that Lahman was introduced to her by church members who recommended him as being an hones and upright man and that it was responsive to this that she consented to marry him. She asks the court to issue a restraining order to repent him from disposing of his property and that judgment be rendered in her favor in the amount of $1,500 and that her former name of Emma J. Outland be restored. The defendant took the std in his own behalf Saturday morning and was not excused until this afternoon, after he had fairly quivered under the sharp cross-examination executed by Attorney Pomeroy It has been many months since the trial of a divorce case or any other sort of litigation ha drawn such crowds in the courtroom as has the Lahnum suit, occupying the attention of the court yesterday and this morning. Late yesterday the daughters of the plaintiff, both of whom are of tender years testified as to the failure of the defendant to support the family, and as in the cruelty to Mrs. Lahnum. They told of how they had worked and earned money, which they gave to their mother to assist in buying provisions. The older of the daughters testified that on one occasion Mr. Lahnum became angry with the plaintiff and grabbing a knife cut a hole in the tablecloth and, proceeding toward the defenseless woman. Mrs. Lahnum ran out of the house and sought refuse in the grape vines. A few minutes later one of the girls was digging for horse radish when Mr. Lahnum exclaimed: Thai’s right, dig a grave for her." Two interesting witnesses were Messer William Preston, son in law of the defendant and Guerrick who belong to the Saints church The former admitted on the witness stand that he had caused letters to be sent to Mr. Lahnum informing him that he was violating the holy law by living with a divorced woman. Mr. Pomeroy interrogated: "Did you not consider this wedding to in the affairs of Mr. and Mrs. Lahnum:" "No sir, he replied, "I considered it a matter of importance to his spiritual welfare." Mr. Garrick (Note difference in spelling from above) testified along the same line as did Mr. Preston, also stating n the course of his testimony that the fact that Mr. Lahnum had married a divorced woman caused consideration in their spiritual relations and that the matter had been discussed pr and con. Each of these witnesses was rigidly cross-examined during which many objections were interposed. Paper states: Judge Bratton last evening rendered judgment in the case of Emma J. Lahnum versus William Lahnum granting a divorce decree to the plaintiff, together with $150 alimony and the costs of the litigation. It will be remembered that the case was hotly contested by the defendant, he filing a cross complaint and making a vigorous effort to discountenance the original complaint Some rather sensational evidence was introduced. The trial consuming several days time. The matter of rendering judgment was postponed indefinitely and those interest have anxiously awaited a decision. Mrs. Lahnum sued her husband for $1,500 alimony claiming that the property occupied by him rightfully belonged t her. By the terms of the decision Mr. Lahnum will retain possession of the tract of lad until the time of his date Paper also states: Almost every available space in the courtroom was occupied today by spectators and witnesses when the divorce suit entitled Mrs. Emma J. Lahnum vs. William Lahnum was begun. The plaintiff was the first witness to take the stand and she submitted evidence, which was indeed derogatory to the defendant. Mrs. Lahnum testified that on one occasion which her daughter was sick Mr. Lahnum said: :"There is always someone sick around here," and the girl told her mother of the circumstance. The mother spoke to Mr. Lahmun abut the circumstances and with the words; "Did she tell you about that,: he went upstairs where the girl whose name was Gale, was lying in bed sick. He grabbed her from bed, the witness continued, and bumped her head against the wall until large bumps raised. The daughter was then required to leave home. The affray so freighted one of the children that she ran to the neighbors. Mrs. Lahnum told of what articles she owned in the house on the tract of land and stated all the facts surrounding the transactions between she and her husband. She was a very good witness and her direct testimony remained practically unshaken. A number of other witnesses will be examined this afternoon and it will require part of tomorrow, it is thought, to complete the case. It is hinted that some sensational evidence will be introduced as the trial proceeds and the promise of this is responsible for the large crowd present I the courtroom. The plaintiff is represented by Attorney J. E. Pomeroy, while the interest of the defendant are being cared for by Attorney’s Hoffman and Link. The outcome of the matter will be eagerly awaited by the public. Another article in the January 13th paper states: That his better half, who is the complainant in a divorce case filed against him in the circuit court, is possessed of an unruly tongue, which she had not failed to use to make his life miserable, that she has assaulted him with a corset, that she had falsely charged him with having been guilty of immoral conduct with other women are the allegations set forth by William Lahmun in his answer filed in the circuit court to the complaint of Mrs. Emma J. Lahmun. By the tenor of the answer filed in two paragraphs, the defendant does not take exceptions in the granting of the decree by he petitions the court to protect his property rights. By his answer Mr. Lahmun informs the court that he is seventy years of age and ill health while his wife, he states is eighteen years his junior and hale and vigorous. The defendant admits having told the wife that she was under the influence of the devil after being Provoked considerably by her. The case will come up for trial tomorrow afternoon and it is understood that the defendant will fight bitterly to save what he calls his property. Paper states: Mrs. William Lahnum, residing a short distance north of town, was taken very seriously ill Tuesday from an attack of nervous prostration and her condition is considered quire serious. Mrs. Lahnum, as it will be remembered, recently figured in a divorce case, which she instituted against her husband. She was granted a decree together with alimony. For several years she has had much trouble but has withstood the strain until this morning, when she completely broke down, a nervous wreck. She is under the care of a physician and it is hoped that she will be restored to health in the near future. The unfortunate woman has the sympathy of her friends.     In DeKalb County Marriages there is a marriage for a William Lahnum, age 63 born in Morrow Co., OH. 1 previous Marriage. He was a Junk man. His parents were Dennis & Nancy (Quean) Lahnum. He married Emma J. Atha (her maiden name) age 45 born in Logan Co. Ohio 2 previous marriage. Last Marriage Ouland. Her parents were Washington & Sarah (Lingrel) Atha. They were married November 8, 1902 in Auburn, IN
Order Book 44                 Auburn Courier	May Term 1910 Page 532               May 4,1910                               June 16, 1910	Martz, Clare E.	Martz, Jay D.	Defendant appears by Jackman and Jackman of Huntington, Indiana Court finds for the plaintiff and she is allowed to have her maiden name restore. (part where name is was destroyed) Paper states By her attorney, G. W. Crooks, Clara E. Martz has instituted divorce proceedings against her husband, Jay D. Martz, Failure to provide cruel and inhuman treatment, and many other charges are made. The plaintiff asks a decree and the restoration of her maiden name Clara Bishop. Paper States: A divorce decree was this morning granted to Clara Martz of Waterloo from her husband J. D. Martz, who resides at Huntington. A Mr. Jackson, an attorney residing at Huntington, appeared for the defendant, and entered a general denial to the charges in the complaint. A decree and the restoration of the plaintiff’s maiden name, Clara Bishop, were given by the Court.
Order Book 44	May Term 1910 Page 533, 565	Miser, Bessie	Miser, Christ	Case 8791 Defendant in default. Page 565 Divorce granted to Plaintiff and she is to have custody of minor child: Madonna Miser aged 9 years of age.
Auburn Courier	March 24, 1910	Mobley, Oscar	Mobley, Orpha	Oscar Mobley has filed a suit against Orpha Mobley for divorce. He charges her with intimacy with other me and seeks relief from all further obligations.
Order Book 44	October Term 1909 Page 110, December Term 1909 Page 145, Page 146, 147	Neidig, Goldie	Neidig, Dennis	Case 8645 Defendant asks for a dismissal for want of sufficient affidavit. In DeKalb County Marriages there is a marriage for an E. Dennis Neidig, age 23 born in Fairfield Twp, DeKalb Co, to Christ & Sarah (Camp) Neidig. He was a carpenter. He married Goldie Fern Boren, age 17 born in DeKalb County to Frank & Maggie (Walker) Boren. They were married April 5, 1908 in Sedan (DeKalb County) IN. Page 145 Cause is dismissed by Plaintiff and costs are paid. Page 146 Case 8680 Court finds for the Plaintiff and she is to resume her maiden name of Goldie Boren
Order Book 44             Auburn Courier	March Term 1910 Page 368, May Term 1910 Page 469, 470, 493       June 2, 1910	Palmer. Caroline	Palmer, Jonathan	Case 8773 Notice published in the Auburn Dispatch and defendant in default. Page 493 Court grants divorce to Plaintiff at her costs. Paper States: Caroline Palmer was this morning granted legal separation from her husband Jonathan Palmer after submission of testimony to the court. Representing the defendant, Prosecutor Hartman file an answer to the first paragraph making a general denial. A Plain decree was granted In DeKalb County Marriages there is a marriage for a Jonathan Palmer age 59 born in Marion Co., OH with 1 previous marriage. He was a farmer. His parents were Reuben& Francis (Bickford) Palmer. He married Caroline Trimple (maiden name) age 54 born in Switzerland, 3 previous marriages the last Hesley. Her parents were Henry & Barbara (Biglinger) Trimple. They were Married February 19, 1903 in Hicksville, OH.
Order Book 44	October Term 1909 Page 39, 81	Platter, Astella A.	Platter, Alexander	Case 8564 Divorce Alimony and Custody of child. Defendant asks for a change of venue Page 81 A change of venue is withdrawn Divorce granted to the Plaintiff. In the Auburn Courier, April 28, 1910 there is an article titled: Platter Girl Tells of Father’s Deed’s) In the Auburn Courier May 12, A Unique Agreement in Platter Case. Also an article: The Platter Case Was Settled Monday.
Order Book 44	March Term 1910 Page 410, 411	Phillips, Jessie	Phillips, Jay	Defendant in default. Divorce granted to the Plaintiff.
Auburn Courier	June 23, 1910	Rupert, Julius	Rupert, Hattie	Paper States: That his affections were obtained under false pretense and that he was decoyed into marrying the defendant oblivious of the fact that she was at that time of their marriage the mother of an illegitimate child, are the chief charges made by Julius Rupert of Concord township against his wife, Hattie Rupert, in a complaint he has filed asking for a divorce decree and other relief. The complainant recites the fact that on August fourth 1907, he wedded the defect in Iowa, she claiming to be a virtuous woman Shortly afterward he was compelled to return to Adams county to look after business interests and his wife refused to accompany him. After he arrived he received a letter from Mrs. Rupert, in which she asked that he send her twenty dollars to pay her transportation here. The money was forwarded but Hattie did not show up. A year later she wrote asking for another twenty and the amount was forwarded. She then came to the home of the plaintiff brining wither a stranger whom she claimed to be her father. The defendant paid her attention, to the stranger and did not manifest affection for the plaintiff after her arrival.
Order Book 44                 Auburn Courier	December Term 1909 Pages 224, 225               January 27, 1910	Sewell, Sarah	Sewell, John B	Divorce Notice has been filed in the local newspaper and the defendant is in default. Divorce granted to the plaintiff and she is to resume her former name of Sarah E. Steel. Judge Bratton granted a divorce decree to Sarah E. Sewell from her husband John B. Sewell. In court this morning and restored her maiden name Sarah E. Steele. The defendant will be remembered as the man who some time ago gave out the erroneous statement that he was contemplating committing suicide and subsequently left for the north. It was thought that he was mentally unbalanced. He did not appear in the case and the decree was granted by default.
Order Book 44	October Term 1909 Page 118	Shelkett, Gilbert D.	Shelkett, Jessie A.	Divorce granted to Plaintiff.
Order Book 44         Auburn Courier	March Term 1910 Page 395, 396       January 20, 1910                                                                                                                         April 14, 1910	Swank, John A	Swank, Alice H	Notice filed in the Auburn Courier. Defendant in default. Divorce granted to the Plaintiff. Paper states: That John Swank has been a henpecked husband during his short matrimonial career and that his life has been in jeopardy would be inferred by the reading of a complaint he filed in the circuit court Saturday, in which he demands legal separation from his wife, Alice A Swank. The complainant recites the fact that the parties were intermarried September 21, 07 and lived together as man and wife until January 11, 1908. The husband charges cruel and inhuman treatment also that the defendant has at times threatened to take his life. He states that he was in constant fear, thinking that she would fee him poison at any moment. Mr. Swank also charges that his better half deserted him and that on November 9th, 1907 she came to Auburn in company with another man, returning late in the evening in an intoxicated condition causing him much humiliation. At that time he separated from the woman, but took her back to his bosom after she promised to be a good girl and refrain from any such conduct in the future. He charges that subsequent to their second compact Mrs. Swank did to improve but her actions were unbearable and he asks legal separation. Paper States "Unfaithful to her marriage vows, possessor of an ungovernable temper, poor housekeeper, intimacy with other men" were some of the charges testified to by John A. Swank before Judge Bratton this morning in his effort to secure a divorce from his wife, Alice A. Swank. Much strength was added to the reason of the plaintiff for desiring the severance of the matrimonial ties by the presentation of a letter from her pen in which she informed Mr. Swank that no poor man could give her the luxuries she exacted from a husband, Attorney Link represented the plaintiff and had several witnesses to testify as to the conduct of the defendant. When. Mrs. Swank, mother of the plaintiff was called the judge informed counsel that he desired no more evidence on the matter. A decree was granted without hesitancy, the evidence being conclusive.
Order Book 44	December Term 1909 Page 173	Thomas, Vincent J	Thomas, Carrie E.	Case 8620 cause is dismissed by Plaintiff at his costs.
Order Book 44                                                                         Auburn Courier	December Term 1909 Page 231, 232, 233                                                                     January 20, 1910                                                                                   January 27, 1910	Townley, Clara	Townley, Egbert	Case 9092 defendant in default. Court trial finds that she is to recover $210. from defendant. Pages 232, 233 Case 9093 Divorce granted and plaintiff to have custody of Cecil Townley, Mabel Townley, Gladys Townley and Vivian Townley the minor children. Child support of $10 per month until the youngest child, Vivian Townley reaches 16 years of age. Plaintiff to have and recover $1,000 in alimony and all costs of this action. In DeKalb County Marriages there is a marriage for a Egbert S. Townley age 19 born in Indiana. He married Clara Grube age 18 born in Indiana to Jefferson and? (Dudley) Grube. They were married May 22, 1890 in Auburn, Indiana. Paper States Bert Townley, introduction unnecessary, whose antics of the past few months have furnished more head liners that those of any other DeKalb county man, and who by his disrupt table maneuvers has enlisted the contempt of all with whom he has had dealings, has now been ostracized from the affections of his wife Clara, she having by her attorney, D. D. Moody, filed a complaint in the circuit court this afternoon asking for separation from the man. The charge of failure to provide is the principal cause set but in the complaint as reason for a divorce and she asks also for alimony in the sum of $2,000 Mrs. Townley has also filed a complaint for the recovery of $225. She alleges the defendant borrowed from her during their matrimonial career. The parties were married May 22, 1890 Paper states: Judge Bratton granted a divorce decree to Clara Townley from her husband, Edgert Townley, this noon (from Monday’s addition) after hearing evidence supporting her contention of atonement. The plaintiff asked for $2,000 alimony ad $100 per year for the support of her children, together with the custody of the children. Alimony in the amount of $1,000 was granted and ten dollars per month allowed the plaintiff for the care of the children.
Order Book 44       Auburn Courier	May Term 1910 Page 450, 451     May 4, 1910	Treesh, Ada J.	Treesh, Martin L	Case 8799 Defendant in default. Divorce granted to the Plaintiff. Paper states: Charging cruel and inhuman treatment and several other things., Mrs. Ada J. Treesh has filed a divorce suite against her husband Martin Treesh. She alleges that he has called her vile names and that he has made the statement that he is very sorry that he ever married her. In DeKalb County Marriages there is a marriage for a M. L. Treesh, age 47 born in DeKalb Co. He was a Laborer. His parents were Michael & Nancy (Cramer) Treesh. He married Ada Tingle (Maiden name) age 38 born in Williams Co. Oho 2 previous marriages, last was Howell. Her parents were H. F. & Tuber (Hane) Tingle. They were married October 3, 1908 in Auburn.
Order Book 44           Auburn Courier	May Term 1910 Page 494, 529, 544         June 23, 1910	Wareham, Mabel	Wareham, Eugene	Case 8814 For Support. (This case is in with the Order Book 43) Page 529 Case continued. Page 544 Case continued. Paper States: Before Judge Bratton took their case under advisement this afternoon he gave Mr. and Mrs. Eugene Wareham a lecture which they will not forget for some time. Mabel the wife and plaintiff asked for five dollars per week for the maintenance of her family, and Eugene fought the case. Very spicy testimony was introduced thought the trial, and to show that the home of Mrs. Jennie Bowman, mother of the plaintiff was a fit place in which to raise the Wareham children the attorney for the plaintiff placed this woman on the stand to refute the testimony of the defendant who stated under oat that she, Mrs. Bowman had been frequently visited by men and that she drank intoxicating liquor. The case was taken under advisement and will be decided in the near future. Another article: Eugene Wareham, in compliance with the order of Judge Bratton, has rented a property in Waterloo and proposes to provide for his wife, Mabel Wareham, a comfortable home. He would like very much, he says, to live with his wife again and forget all differences they have had. Whether or to a reconciliation can be effected remains to be see, as the attitude of Mabel is to known. Another Article Mabel and Eugene Wareham had a inning in court today and evidence bordering might close on the sensational was submitted by both sides in the action brought by the wife asking that the defendant be compelled to pay her the sum of $5. per week for the maintenance of herself and children. A large number of witnesses were examined and some spicy testimony was given. Attorney Leas for the defendant gave out the information late this afternoon that Eugene was dead willing to take his wife to his bosom again and support her if she would only say the word, but the word was not spoken and the trial proceeded. The couple were married, separated and re married and have had quite an extensive experience on the matrimonial sea and in the divorce courts for their years. In another article, same date: Eugene Wareham of Waterloo appeared in court this morning and assured Judge Bratton that he would provide for his wife. Mr. and Mrs. Wareham have adjusted their differences and will live together again. It is hoped that their matrimonial affairs will be more pleasant than has been true in the past. In DeKalb County Marriages there is a marriage for a Eugene Wareham age 24 born in Waterloo, IN. He was a laborer. His parents were Edward & Edith (Brown) Wareham. He married Mabel Bowman who was 19 born in Waterloo, IN to George & Jennie (DeLong) Bowman. They were married March 13, 1910 in Windsor, Canada.
Auburn Courier	June 2, 1910	Wasson, Benjamin	Wasson, Annie	Paper States: Benjamin Wasson, by a complaint filed in the circuit court this morning asks the court that the bonds of matrimony existing between himself and his wife, Annie Wasson, be severed. The plaintiff charges his wife with having lived in adultery with one Ace Wasson, and in his complaint he specifies many different times that they have been guilty of improper conduct.
Order Book 44	October Term 1909 Page 30, 31	Vanbuskirk, Charles W.	Vanbuskirk Mary Francis	Case 8587 Notice published in the DeKalb County Herald. Mary Francis is a non-resident of state. Defendant in default. Divorce granted to the Plaintiff.