Hide Article Text (OCR)
[■I2KDAY, TILY 0, 1001.HOOL:m:m, nr ;vi i»k-l he.the StateCeport*the well is now on signatures to present establish-I I or deaf stern puit •ding with it* will ouor Front h urpose e.c-jwu:citizens of! h «I f In i *. 1 llilv III' • vand dumb ng in the of whom the state,or to bear 'vine west-I. Coflse-y at home * time has['I'twity for hundred ncll Bluffs vided tor. s, we thefully pell-school inra.reach was ie M« osen-■Ignatures ecured 4UO j northern this vichi-MARRIES AGAIN.mhs. iii;i\(;aktnkh wkds a manWHO W \M lint STAR HO A Hunt.SUv lld Not tilve Her Right Nmue When the License Was Procured ' -Mh» Cause 'i'ronhle.Mil; Hattie Hetngartfter did not remain long' u divorced woman. She . Is n *w .Mr's. 8tc* s»*. Isolds Hteoso called at the office of the clerk of the courts last Saturday and said he desired to get a marriage license. lie was 'waited on by iMputy Clerk Stemm. who asked hint what tin nurm- of his Intended bride was. He produced a slip of paper on which hu own mid Hie name of Alls?* Hattie Me-Mahon was written. He wms thevo visited ro Gordo, ijsco, Kotj-soli. Clay, Woodbury, houn. andn required to make affidavit that there wviu no legal impediments to his getting married, and a license was tiien issued to him. The to-be bride was not present, ami Air. Steese gave, her ago as 41 years and bis own After he had taken His departure. Mr- Stcmm w«m asked if h« knew who Hattie McMahon was and he replied In the negative, fvheh he was told that she was Mrs. Hattie HSffcgaiA-ner. who created such a furore while giv ing testimony in the divorce proceeding”, in which she wan the defendant and which had the effect of making Judge O'Donnell feel ns though life were not worth the living.The marriage was performed by the Ms, L. J. Brenner, parftor or the--Herman Methodist church, el Seventeenth and Iowa streets, and was witnessed by Mrs. Lydia Brenner and Mrs. Elizabeth Beru-Imrdt. When 8toese. who w as the “star boarder whoso name figured In the divorce proceedings, called ut the clerk * office, lie said he was In u hurry to gei back to Chicago, arid did not want toe deputy to lose any. time in making out the cupid plaster. Now the peculiar thing about this marriage Is that Air*. Hal A* gattner uss'jined her maiden name when she had no leg u right, so it is said, to it. In the decree of divorce granted by Judne O Donnell, nothing Is said us to her get-CoolA nof al pletethe f| Tli is iii ai-Hort 1I eity.I Styli.il I Monar i nient,! Prices! *2.00 iting back her maiden num« ; and in theNew 1 the neshin Ituentialcross petRlon for n divorce which filed she did not ask to be given back in r maiden name, ho that she had no right to use it when she married the starI lei n-inoxt en-*• I tfo. is it will » sign an di of Ihelion since Websler ••alls. El-liictn, unit August 11 hold ato ao, esolu Uonst, the •:»-boarder. She was still Mrs. Hsttl gsrtner and not Miss Hattie McMahon when -I sigmd her name to the return made by the minister wh«» married her. it is umlersbxHi that tlu* luw provides that the witnesses to a mani . must know' the j arsons who art married; otherwise they are incompetent to act as witnesses. The question now in: I_Hthe wiiiieftsts to the marriage know that the principals are'the persons they r seated themselves to be? A lawyer that under the decree and her own i slon to risk for it. Mrs. Ildnitannrr not Justified in law in assuming her maiden name. lie said he did not know that anyone would trouble himself about theWe arhis str Hinootl tiling ,at /()«•.pri-naysmis-wasHot wMere»*i rlrawei al. A and...
Newspaper Details
Daily Times
Dubuque, Iowa, US
Tue, Jul 09, 1901
Page 5
Full Page
Clipped by
Carol L.
NY, USA 05 Aug 2017
Other Publications Near Dubuque, Iowa
Sunday Morning Telegraph
Dubuque Daily Telegraph
Dubuque Daily Herald
Dubuque Democratic Herald
Dubuque Witness
