The Diamond Stud Caught Between Two Wives
A tangle of divorce, debt, and pawnbroking ends up in court as two wives fight over the same piece of jewelry.
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 jury in the case of Charlotte A. Lord vs. James H. Woolery, sheriff, returned a verdict for the plaintiff, which entitles her to the diamond stud in controversy. The case was a peculiar one: the plaintiff is Lord's second wife. While Lord lived with his first wife, she secured a divorce and a $600 judgment against him. During that marriage, Lord possessed the diamond stud, but due to financial hardship, it was sold to Mrs. McMakin. After his divorce, Lord married Mrs. McMakin. Becoming hard up again, he pawned the diamond. When his first wife learned of this, she levied on the ring to satisfy her judgment. The second wife, Mrs. Lord, brought a suit of replevin against the sheriff, who was holding the ring for the first wife, resulting in the court siding with the current Mrs. Lord.
“The case was a peculiar one, and attracted considerable attention on its trial.”
Domestic disputes over assets during divorce are timeless, though the specific mechanism of 'levying on a diamond stud' illustrates how personal property was once the primary target for settling debts and judgments in the late 19th century.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.