The Custody Battle of 1892
A broken leg, a trip to Los Angeles, and a claim of infidelity lead to a bitter divorce trial in Seattle as parents clash over their son.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
The troubles of John M. Moore and his wife were brought into the divorce court yesterday. Both parties are willing to be divorced, but the bone of contention is their 11-year-old boy, Willis. Mrs. Moore testified that her husband had drank for years, was cross, and quarrelsome, and had provided poorly for her. Last summer he went away to Los Angeles and was gone for several months, during which time she received nothing from him and was compelled to support herself and the boy. Several neighbors testified to Moore's getting drunk and raising disturbances. The boy, Willie, a bright-faced little fellow, was sworn and told the court that his mother had taken care of him, while his father had neglected him. He preferred to stay with his mother. Moore was the first witness in his own behalf. His story was that he and his wife were married thirteen years ago in Marshalltown, Iowa, and their relations were pleasant until last July, when, while working as a carpenter, he fell from a scaffold and injured his leg. He supposed then that she preferred a man with two good legs. He had gone to Los Angeles and was in the hospital for weeks. When he returned to Seattle he found his wife had formed an affection for Lieutenant Sullivan of the fire department. For the sake of his boy he tried to keep the matter quiet, and finally consented to drop out if he could have the boy. He admitted getting drunk, but said he had never taken liquor to excess until after the trouble with his wife.
“He supposed then that she preferred a man with two good legs.”
Divorce and custody battles have long been a fixture of the Seattle courts, highlighting the intersection of family trauma and legal power. Even in 1892, the courtroom served as a theater for private disputes that, much like today, often pitted traditional gender roles against the realities of working-class survival and shifting domestic loyalties.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.