|
NEWS ARTICLES Union County Illinois Genealogy Trails Her Honor Vindicated Transcribed and submitted by
Darrel Dexter
State's Attorney W. D. Lyerle
was engaged in a sensational divorce trial at Harrisburg last week,
winning a complete victory for his client, a wronged and persecuted
woman whose own husband concocted a vile conspiracy against her.
Miss Gertrude Carter
was a Union County girl, a daughter of Calvin Carter,
a well-to-do farmer who has long lived between Anna and Cobden. A few years ago, and when
not much past the age of 16, Gertrude married a young man named W. C. Lilley, also a resident of this county,
living at or near Anna. The
father opposed the match, and an estrangement resulted between him and
his daughter. Mrs. Lilley patiently endured ill treatment
from her husband, but when he charged her with infidelity she left him,
going to a married sister in Cairo.
Lilley then
brought suit for divorce, naming a prominent physician of high
character at Harrisburg as co-respondent.
When the father heard his daughter's story his
sympathies were enlisted and his indignation aroused, and he engaged
Mr. Lyerle to go to Harrisburg and
look after her interests. The
result was the complete discomfiture and humiliation of Lilley,
if such a creature can be humiliated and the return of the wronged wife
to her girlhood home with her name untarnished and her honor vindicated.
The rest of the story is told in the following from
the Harrisburg Evening Chronicle of
April 9, and from the vigorous expressions used one can easily judge
the sentiment and feeling there:
"The sensational Lilley
divorce case ended in circuit court here Friday with a complete victory
for the wife, who has been so shamefully persecuted in this scandalous
suit and with Dr. Fuson whose
character has been so bitterly assailed, standing exonerated before the
community. The
original bill charging adultery was withdrawn, also all evidence and
the complainant's answer to the wife's cross bill.
The court granted the wife a divorce on the charge
of extreme and repeated cruelty and she was given her maiden name.
"The case, which was begun in circuit court
Wednesday, has attracted widespread attention and the court room has
been filled during its progress. Early
Friday morning the crowd gathered to hear the attorneys' arguments and
as Attorney Whitley, representing
the complainant, arose and addressed the court in withdrawing the suit,
the silent surprise throughout the room and the rejoicing in the hearts
of many friends of Dr. and Mrs. Fuson,
who have so bravely stood together through it all, made the scene a
most impressive one. The
little woman, who has been subjected to every cruel and shameful
indignity conceivable, is not very well acquainted in this city, but
this ordeal, terrible as it is, has won for her a host of friends who
have been confident of her innocence since the first morning she
appeared in court. Her
father, Mr. Carter, who is one of
the most highly respected citizens of Union County, has never left her
side. And the good
citizens of this city are proud to know that he can take her back to
her girlhood home with her character still above reproach. Attorney
Whitley informed the court
that his complainant desired to withdraw the original bill, charging
adultery, also that all their evidence be stricken from the docket, and
the court was further informed that there would be no answer to the
wife's cross bill. The
court discharged the jury and granted the wife a divorce on the charge
of extreme and repeated cruelty and restoring her maiden name, Gertrude
Carter.
Judge Lewis
delivered a short but impressive address in which he said, "There is no
evidence in this record against her of the charge of adultery and the
charge is now withdrawn. She
has testified, and has been corroborated here about repeated acts of
cruelty inflicted on her by her husband and this was not denied and is
sufficient to justify her to be entitled to a divorce." Those
who have firmly believed in the innocence of the persecuted were
extremely anxious to hear the pleas of Attorneys Lyerle
and Lewis. They were not uneasy as to
the outcome of the trial and they could not have hoped for a more
complete victory than this. Had
the jury vindicated the woman there might have remained in some a doubt
as to her character, but as it is now, with her persecutors withdrawing
the terrible charge and all their disgraceful evidence, thereby
admitting in spite of the defiant and detestable spirit they have
exhibited that they were whipped at their own game, there can be no
doubt in any sane mind as to the little woman's virtue and the motives
which prompted this slanderous charge. The audience was very impressed
with Attorney Lyerle, who appeared
in this court for the first time.
Mr. Lyerle is
serving his second term as state's attorney of Union County. When he began his opening
statement to the jury Wednesday morning there were some whom feared
because of his unusual manner, so different from the ordinary court
room lawyer, that he would be too slow, but this opinion was soon
changed as the audience soon realized that in Mr. Lyerle
the defense had able assistance. His
tactful mention of the term blackmail was followed by a long and
thoughtful silence, and it is said that this would have been one of the
strongest points in his closing argument.
Mr. Lyerle is
well acquainted with the Carter
family, and he told the jury that he was proud to be before them to
vouch for the character of that little woman and those who were
acquainted with his pleading say that they expected to hear one of the
most powerful arguments ever made in this court.
Happily it was not needed. Many
were astonished at the manner in which the complainant sought to gain
his end. When he
was under cross examination Attorney Lyerle
produced a letter written to the Anna Democrat
in which the writer requested that paper to publish the first news
article published in the Chronicle
relative to the suit. The
letter bore the signature of the Harrisburg
Chronicle. This
was a forgery, and when Lilley was
confronted with the letter on the witness stand he admitted that he
wrote it and also admitted that he had no authority to use that
signature. The only
motive explaining such action seems to be that he hoped to discredit
his wife in her home town, Anna. However,
the Anna Democrat did not publish
the article. The testimony of the chief witness
for the complainant was the most scandalous and the most ridiculous
ever heard in any court room. Dr.
and Mrs. Fuson are among the most
highly respected citizens of this city, and to the thinking people this
has been one of the most outrageous attempts to blacken the character
of an innocent man that they have ever known. (Jonesboro
Gazette, Jonesboro, Illinois, 16 Apr 1915) |