The first divorce

Although she was married at least eight times, and divorced from five of her husbands, I suspect that the first divorce was the most traumatic and integral to how my great-grandmother would pursue the rest of her life. It is also rather significant, not just because it was her first marriage, but also because the marriage produced her and her husband’s only two children—my grandmother and great-uncle.

Divorce in 1922 could not have been easy, particularly for a woman. While national suffrage had been achieved in 1920, in time for the election, there were still powerful forces at play that considered women’s first and only duty was to support her husband and raise his children. In the home, she was still subservient.

According to the Sandusky County Ohio Chancery Court records, divorce actions were removed from the jurisdiction of the Ohio Supreme Court in 1844, giving that responsibility to county chancery courts. At that time, “Ohio law provided that divorce petitions could be filed for the following causes: adultery, bigamy, impotence, extreme cruelty, and imprisonment for violations of Ohio criminal laws and /or other state and territorial laws equivalent to Ohio’s.” Further, “in 1840, under Ohio law, gross neglect of duty, fraudulent contract, and habitual drunkenness for a period of three years were added as legal grounds for divorce. It was necessary for plaintiffs to prove to the court that the allegations contained in their petitions were true.”

On June 23, 1922, via her attorney, Telma R. Smith, Leta Chetister filed a petition in the Court of Common Please of Lucas County, Ohio, to divorce her husband Ralph Chetister. My great-grandparents had been married nine years and separated on February 15. Indeed, the document reflects different addresses for my great-grandparents.

The cause of the separation and petition for the divorce was “extreme cruelty.” Leta cited several incidents of extremely hostile encounters in which her husband called her “vile and indecent names, unfit to be set forth herein, charged plaintiff [Leta] with unchastity, when defendant [Ralph] knew, or had ample opportunity to know that plaintiff was chaste, putting plaintiff at great fear and causing plaintiff great mental and physical suffering and anguish.”

The three-page document, which I obtained from the archives of the Court, lists several instances that paint a rough picture of my great-grandfather, including he had a violent temper, mistreated her lady friends by “insulting and ungentlemanly conduct,” “consorting and keeping company with women other than his wife,” and “had been guilty of neglect of duty.”

Three witnesses to the relationship were called. There is no indication that Ralph opposed the petition, and the divorce was granted on November 8, 1922. No details of custody, alimony and property distribution are listed. However, Leta agreed to pay $1,870.65 in court costs and fees.

At this time, however, Leta did not stay divorced for long. After all, she had two children to raise and support. In fact, it is quite likely she had been seeing her second husband long before November 8, although no evidence so far that she knew him before she filed for divorce in July. She married this man, Albert Mohr, on November 29, three weeks later.