Divorce Records & Newspaper Articles for Sherman E. Dodge

No. 35559 DECREE IN DIVORCE

STATE OF COLORADO; COUTNY OF ARAPAHOE IN THE DISTRICT COURT
Mary M Dodge Plaintiff vs. Sherman E. Dodge Defendant

This cause having been brought on to be tried on the First day of October, said day being one of the regular juridical days of the September Term, A.D. 1903, of said Court, the said plaintiff appearing in person, and by Charles L. Richards, Esq., her attorney, and said defendant, though duly summoned, failing to appear and plead within the time required by law, was represented by Walter M. Appel, Esq., the attorney duly appointed by the Court for that purpose. A jury of six persons was regularly empanelled and sworn to try the question of the guilt or innocence of the defendant of the matters charged in the complaint and a true verdict render according to the evidence. Ant the jury, having heard all the evidence, the instructions of the Court, and having found the said defendant guilty of the matters charged in the complaint, and it having been made to appear to the satisfaction of the Court, and the Court so finding:

I. That defendant, Sherman E. Dodge, was duly served with process by delivering to him in the State of Colorado on the 3rd day of May, A.D. 1903, a true copy of the summons in this action together with a copy of the complaint therein.

II. That the plaintiff is now and has been for more than one whole year immediately preceding the commencement of this action, a bona fide resident of this State, and now resides in this County.

III. That on the Fifth day of December, A.D. 1900, the plaintiff and defendant were lawfully married.

IV. That the allegations of the complaint in this action are true.

Wherefore, The Court having this day ordered that judgment herein be rendered on the verdict in this cause, It is CONSIDERED, ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by the Court:

I. That the bonds of matrimony existing between the plaintiff, Mary M. Dodge, and the defendant, Sherman E. Dodge, be and the same are hereby dissolved, and that said parties are and each of them is freed and absolutely released therefrom.

II. That until the expiration of the full period of one year from and after the day of the date hereof, neither of said parties be permitted to remarry to any other person.

III. That the sole care, custody and control of the said minor child be and the same are hereby awarded to the said plaintiff until the further order of this Court in the premises.

IV. The plaintiff have judgment for her costs in this behalf expended to be taxed, and execution may issue therefore.

Done and signed in open Court this 1st day of October, A.D. 1903 F.T. Johnson Judge

COMPLAINT
State of Colorado; City and County of Denver
DISTRICT COURT

Mary M. Dodge, Plaintiff vs. Sherman E. Dodge, Defendadt

Comes now the plaintiff above named and for cause of action alleges:

First. That for more than one year immediately preceding the commencement of this action, this plaintiff was and now is a resident of the said State of Colorado and County of Arapahoe, now City and County of Denver.

Second. That on, to-wit: the fifth day of December A.D. 1900, this plaintiff and defendant intermarried and ever since have been, and now are, husband and wife.

Third. That ever since the said marriage, this plaintiff has demeaned and conducted herself toward this defendant as a chaste, loving, obedient, true and faithful wife, always indulgent and ever endeavoring to make their home pleasant, cheerful and happy.

Fourth. That for about the last two years, this defendant wholly unmindful of his marriage vows and obligations has treated this plaintiff in a most cruel and inhuman manner, abusing and cursing her in the most violent language almost daily, calling her vile names, bruising and maiming her physically and pinching her on her limbs and other parts of her body. That on or about the 15th day of May, A.D. 1902, said defendant caused this plaintiff very great mental anguish and suffering by accusing her of infidelity and telling her that if the child she was then carrying came into the world with a red head, he would pack his grip and leave for good.

Fifth. That on or about the 14th day of January last past he caught hold of plaintiff’s abdomen and pinched her so severely that she was rendered sick for a number of days and suffered great pain and agony. That at various times, the exact date, this plaintiff not being able to recall, this defendant, without just cause or provocation used vile and profane language toward this plaintiff, calling her vulgar names and frequently and unjustly, and without cause or provocation, accused this plaintiff of infidelity, causing this plaintiff great mental suffering and anguish.

Sixth. That on various occasions during their aid married life this defendant, without cause or provocation threatened to de grievous bodily harm and violence to this plaintiff, causing her great fear and mental suffering.

Seventh. That the parties to this action have no minor children.

WHEREFORE, this plaintiff prays judgment against this defendant, in that the bonds of matrimony heretofore existing between this plaintiff and defendant be dissolved and held for naught. That this plaintiff have judgment against this defendant for costs of Court and for reasonable Attorneys fees.

Charles L. Richards
Attorney for Plaintiff

This is from a newspaper article from The Daily News: Denver, Colorado, October 2, 1903.

GRANT DECREE TO MRS. DODGE

Her Husband Had Gained Fame by Writing Letter to Court, Denying Charges Made by His Wife.

The divorce case instituted by Mary M. Dodge against Sherman E. Dodge was decided yesterday afternoon in Judge Johnson's court by a verdict in favor of the plaintiff.
The defendant, a ranchman, failed to put in an appearance, so a verdict was found for Mrs. Dodge in a few minutes.
The Dodge case was one of the most interesting that has occupied the attention of the district court for some time. In a complaint filed by Mrs. Dodge some months ago she accused her husband of abusing and cursing her continuously. Further she claimed that he told her if the child she was about to bear would be red-headed he would pack his grip and depart.
Dodge is a ranchman and at present employed in Cokeville, Wyo. He created somewhat of a sensation shortly after the divorce papers were served on him by making an answer to the charge in the shape of a letter addressed to the court. In this letter he denied the charges of cruelty, but admitted having told his wife that if her child would be red-headed he would pack his grip and go. As a reason for his remarks he stated she was being attended by a doctor who was red-headed, and who jokingly remarked to him what he had done for his wife.

Says She Was a Spiritualist

Further the husband wrote that the wife took up the joke and continued with it until he was almost wild with desperation. In conclusion the letter states that his wife was a spiritualist, and held nightly séances with a Professor Pipinger, an authority on the subject of the spirit world. The letter was produced in court, but as the writer was absent and failed to prove his claims, it was ignored and the wife given the desired decree.


This is from a newspaper article titled Wedded in Haste; Wife now Repents, from the Denver Republican, October 2, 1903

Mary M. Dodge Granted Divorce From Sherman E.

A divorce case which was marked with some unusual accusations what that of Mary M. Dodge, who yesterday secured a divorce in the district court before Judge Johnson against Sherman E. Dodge of Cokeville, Wyo. In her complaint, Mrs. Dodge made many allegations of cruelty. Summons was served on Dodge, who is a prominent stockman of Wyoming at his home. In reply he wrote a long letter addressed to the district court. This letter was a personal communication, but had it been drawn up in legal form it would have amounted to an answer and crossbill.
They were married Dec. 5, 1900. In her complaint, Mrs. Dodge alleged that her husband accused her of infidelity. She also charged that he beat and cursed and reviled her. A jury of six men gave her a verdict without leaving the courtroom.
In the letter which Dodge wrote the district court, he said he had been gathering horses in Wyoming and had been hurt so that it would be impossible for him to attend the trial. He suggested that an attorney be appointed to defend him. As to the charge of cruelty and tongue lashings with which his wife accused him, Dodge denied every word except that he admitted he had insinuated that she was untrue to him.
“As for using vulgar language,” continued the letter, “I could not come anywhere near the language she would use to me.”

Says Wife Was Violently Addicted to Spiritualism

Beside all this, Dodge wrote the court that his wife had become violently addicted to spiritualism and that she had been wont to sit up at night with one Pepinger, in order that they might consult with the spirits which were at Pepinger’s beck and call. Dodge said this resulted to his exceeding detriment, as he was working at the time and was forced to go to his work with a cold breakfast or one which he had cooked himself.


This is from a newspaper article titled The Moans of the Tied, from The Denver Post, October 2, 1903.

The Doctor and the Red-Headed Heir, a Tale of Northern Wyoming, or the Last Mournful Dirge of Sherman Dodge.

A Red-Headed Joke

Nightly sessions with one Prof. Pepinger and resultant cold breakfasts appear to have made Sherman E. Dodge, a ranchman of Cokeville, Wyo., so angry that he said mean things to his wife, Mary, and because of these mean things the latter secured a divorce from him yesterday in the district court. She charged that he beat and cursed her and accused her of infidelity. Her husband did not appear to defend, and filed no answer, but wrote the court a personal letter in which he recounted the times his wife has sat up to commune with absent friends until so late an hour that the next morning he would have to get his own breakfast or go without. He charged also that before the birth of a child, the family doctor, who was red-headed, indulged in some merry persiflage to the general effect that the coming hopeful would be auburn-crested, also which little joke, Mr. Dodge alleged, his wife took up as a good one and often repeated. Mr. Dodge’s letter was ignored because he gave no proof of his allegations.

This is from a newspaper article titled Divorce Law Given Hard Blow, from the Denver Times, October 2, 1903.

Divorce Law Given Hard Blow

Denver Business Men Surprise Court and
Spectators by Refusing to Act.

‘Like a flash two jurors descended from the jury box in Judge Johnson’s court yesterday afternoon, after having stated positively that they would refuse to consider a divorce proceeding, even if it were based upon statutory grounds. H. Byrd Northrup, a real estate man, and James Waddington, a well-known grocer, have taken the lead in maintaining a stand against the free-and-easy divorce grind.’

The unusual scene was enacted at the beginning of the divorce suit of Mary M. Dodge against Sherman E. Dodge. The wife’s complaint alleged that Sherman, who is a miner at Cokeville Wyo., had been guilty of cruelty. The clerk of the court called out the names of twelve men on the jury panel and the dozen took their seats. The attorney for Mrs. Dodge anticipated no difficulty in winning the case, as Dodge was not represented. Usually the plaintiff’s counsel simply asks the stereotyped question as to the jurors having any objections to granting divorces on the grounds permitted by the state laws. The jurors always slowly shake their heads, the attorney mumbles, “Jury accepted,” and then the testimony is heard, the blank verdicts given to the jury, the foreman of which at once signs a finding in favor of the plaintiff, while the other eleven men remain in the box. They think there is nothing else to be done. As a rule in uncontested divorce suits, only about ten or twelve minutes are necessary to free these parties when “God hath joined together.”
Mrs. Dodge’s attorney yesterday stalked to the jury box and carelessly asked, “Have any of you gentlemen objections to granting a divorce upon statutory grounds?”

Both Jurors Objected

“I have sir, yes sir,” and H. Byrd Northrup arose like a dart from the rear of the box.
“And so have I,” came from James Waddington, who also emphasized his opposition by drawing himself to his full height.
The attorney was taken aback quite decidedly. Such a break in the ordinary routine astonished him as well as Judge Johnson, who leaned well forward with brows contracted.
“Do you mean to say, gentlemen,” queried the counselor, “that you are opposed to divorce cases when statutory grounds are alleged? When the grounds are those named in the law?”
“I am opposed, yes sir,” came again from Mr. Northrop, while his companion, Mr. Waddington, nodded and said, “I am.” The attorney looked at the jurors and then at the court. Dead silence pervaded the courtroom.
“What are the grounds, sir?” asked the court. The Counsel replied, “Cruelty.”
Another glance at the two jurors revealed them invincible. “You are excused, gentlemen.” Came from the court.
Two other men were chosen, and as they seemed willing to help out matters, were retained.

Had Good Reasons

Permission from the court having first been obtained, a Times reporter asked Messrs. Waddington and Northrup to state their reasons for thus breaking the usual routine of a divorce mill.
“I am opposed to divorces,” said Mr. Northrup, emphatically. “I am against them under all circumstances, unless possibly infidelity, and even in that case the charge must be proven beyond the least shadow of doubt. A woman marries a man for better or for worse, until death do them part, not a jury whose work is done while you snap your fingers. If a man treats his wife cruelly let her leave him. The courts are here to see that wives are supported. It is a disgrace, the activity of divorce courts, and I am opposed to it. There seems to be no more sanctity about a marriage nowadays than about the purchase of a horse.”

Divorce Too Easy

Mr. Waddington expressed much similar views. “There are too many divorce cases,” said he. “A man and woman decide to separate, they fix upon a deal, one goes into court, the other stays away, and while you are thinking about if the woman marches out free from a tie that God says should bind. If there were less divorces, people would be more careful when they marry. A whole pile of people marry after having known each other but a week or ten days. Such divorces as granted in these days only encourage hasty marriages and throw immense unhappiness upon the world. New York state doesn’t tolerate divorce unless adultery is proven beyond a peradventure of a doubt. Its policy meets with my approval and I shall not be a party to a divorce proceeding even in the capacity of a petit juror.”
Mrs. Dodge testified that her husband pinched her and called her “old sow” and “old bat.” He also said he would deny the paternity of their child if it was born red-headed. She said no woman could live with such a man. Dodge was not in court nor did he defend the suit by counsel but in a letter to the court he said he would admit the charge about the child, but accused his wife of staying up all night with a Spiritualist named Pepinger instead of conducting herself as a wife should.
The jury gave the verdict for the wife without leaving the box, but not until the court had spent half an hour reading the pleadings and Dodge’s letter.