Reading about your relatives in the newspapers can be quite disconcerting. Of course, there are the tame social visits, marriage announcements, anniversaries, etc., but sometimes, the not-so-palatable side can be revealed. In this instance, don't despair! Consider how often you've heard some variation on the advice, "Believe none of what you hear and half of what you see." At the same time, though, "Where there's smoke, there's fire" is also a credible adage. Personally, I think it's important to remember that there are always two sides (often more) to a story. I did my best to allow for both sides in the case of an oft-mentioned aunt, Nettie (Pearson) McClure Hudson Miller Reed Johnson. Allow me to elucidate.
Nettie, you may remember, is a member of the Nobody-Knows-About tribe, but there are some details about which I am quite certain. Detail #1: Nettie was married more than was typical...for any time period. I have been able to prove 5 marriages, but it's possible there were more. Detail #2: Nettie was not a demure wife. This information comes almost entirely from divorce proceedings that found their way into the local newspapers.
If Nettie was properly divorced from her first two husbands, Elmer McClure and Roy Hudson, I haven't found any documentation for it. There is, however, a record for Nettie's divorce from Walter Miller. The cause of the divorce? Cruelty. When I found the divorce decree, I assumed Walter was the guilty party...but apparently not. The newspaper article below details alarming accusations of Nettie threatening physical harm. Guns, knives, and hot grease are all mentioned.
Dec. 8, 1933
Later that same month, though, the following article was found concerning Walter.
Dec. 21, 1933
So, Walter was stealing electricity while also running an illegal still. Furthermore, he was potentially stealing from the railroad. It seems unlikely that all this had transpired in the 13 days since he was granted the divorce. In that case, can we make the argument that Nettie's cruelty was understandable (though perhaps not justifiable)? Was it a response to Walter's illegal activities?
Her track record certainly didn't improve. Just four months into her next marriage, husband Walter Reed filed for divorce. Again, Nettie was charged with cruelty. This time, though, it was more mental than physical. According to article, Nettie taunted Walter and also destroyed his clothes.
Jan. 29, 1935
This divorce was not granted, but Walter tried again 4 years later. The charge was still cruelty, but it sounds more like Walter was embarrassed by his wife's behavior. She wasn't comporting herself like "a proper lady. " Uncomfortable perhaps, but how exactly does it constitute cruelty?
July 8, 1939
In any case, this time, the divorce was granted. Nettie was married again by the 1940 census, but I haven't found any indication of how or why that marriage ended.
As far as these clippings go, I'm not sure what to think about Nettie. She and Walter Miller were married for 15 years, so something must have precipitated her violent behavior. I feel compelled to lay the blame at Walter's feet, but they were probably both guilty of a lack of concern for each other. And while most of what Walter Reed accused her of was unfeeling and improper, I don't think it can be rightly categorized as cruelty. I suppose "callous behavior" wasn't grounds for divorce.
Where am I going with all this? I guess my point is that, while Nettie is painted in a very unflattering light, her husbands probably weren't saints. What we are given in these articles is someone's version of the truth, but as Potiphar says, "Don't believe everything you read, dear." (Name that musical!)
No comments:
Post a Comment