THE LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES 16 ?, \U(I rilOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY!" KXOOrS, Clinpttr 'iO, Virso M. •''JMlor SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS A0A1X8T THY NEIGHBOR !" KXOOrS, Chnptrr aO, V«rse 10. I 3- A'J Ph'ESENT SAILING UNDEIi THE BOGUS NAME 01 Widow (?) Stetefelt, Extracts from an article in the "St. Louis Volksstimme de.s Westens," showing the ways and means A LUSTFUL AND DEGRADED WOMAN Is able to resort to in order to accomplish her FRIVOLOUS PURPOSES. >mii^;Biaa^, 1880. a ■2,' 17 '^ /' The following is a true picture of life, ll shows such an ex- cess, of female depravily and sm-b coldMouded sconndrelisui of a purse-proud upstart, shrinking at no means to hush up his sister's intiuny, that it becomes necessary to expose on public pillory, by this pamphlet, the malefactors who seem to stand outside the pah- of human Ju.^tice. Mr. H. von Wertliern, a well knowu and much respected mem- ber of this community, married in May 1871 the then widow Mary Stetefelt, mother of three ungrowu children and owner of the small house in the sixth district, she then was living in. For about six years the married couple had lived comparativelv contented together, when there came a sad change. But to under- stand better the later events it is necessary to relate an occurance which happened in 187(3. A certain Mr. Gerard owed to Mr. H. von Werthern the sum of $5,58 salary, for which he [Gr.] was in arrears. Having been urged for payment several times, he tinalfy, in February 1S7G, handed lo Mr. von Werthern a very doubtful note for S-jO, with 50 0/0 discount, as payment on account. After much trouble and loss of time, Mr. von Werthern collected the note and credited Mr, Gerard with $25. The Utter afterwards called on Mr. von Werthern and demanded those $25. It is not to be wondered at, that this conduct exasper- ated him and that when Mr. Gerard grew impudent, he threw bim out of doors. To revenge himself, Mr. Gerard swore to an affidavit agidnst him for embezzlement. In absence of the main witnesses for the defence, Mr. von Werthern was forced to trial and pronounced "guilty" by a beastly stupid and corrupt jury, and sentenced to one years' confinement in the State prison. One of these jurymen — Mr. Fred. Bartels — afterwards declared, unsolicited, in the presence of witnesses, that he had considered Mr. von Werthern "not guilty" of the crime accused of, but that he had yealded to the dictate of the foreman of that jury who, right or wrong, was determined on having Mr. von Werthern condemned ; ,567180 : _- 4 — thcit he was soriT for it, etc, [Other n emh^rs of that jury have made similar expressions.— | The friemls of Mr. von Werlhern laid the case, with nnimpeach- ahle proofs of his innocence, before Governor Kellogg, but as the hitter coukl not grant a full pardon, the Senate then n(>t being in session, he changed the sentence to ten days eonlinement in the Parish prison which having already expired, 'Sir. von Werthern wasi released. Shortly afterwards Mr. Gerard's perjurious tongue was para- lyzed by palsy, and four or five months later a second paralytic stroke ended his earthly carreer. About this time Mr. von Werthern's wife showed signs of a material change in her condwct. She man- ifested a rude, overbearing and quanelsome disposition towards her husband, attended, without his knowledge or consent, pic-uics, fairs^ exhibitions, moon-light excursions, anl even strolled to the Fire En- gine houses of Jeiferson City in search of pleasure, while her hus- band had to stay at home and take care of the house. He had to rise and open the street-door for her, when, after midnight or near break of day, she returned home from her pleasure trips ; and to avoid insult be did not dare to utter a word of reproach or discontent. Benign and noble as the tr.utsof character of a vhiitous won)an present themselves, yet a vkhus woman, onee on her downward course, knows no. limit to her d.^pravity. Mrs. von Werthern, alias widow Stetefelt, aUas Mary Roder, grew bolder by the forbearing indulgence of her husband. She open- ly boasted to some of her lady friends that besides her husband she had six paramours, and that she wantetl ''to get rid of lier husband and replace him hy a ymmg and active man.^ She gradually grew so voi.l of shame that slie openty received her lovers in her husband's presence, until finally he accepted a situa- tion that kept him temporarily away from home. Before leaving home he told her, in presence of witnesses, where he went to and for what purpose, and that he would return,, occasionally, whenever his time would allow it. On September 29, 1877 he left home and on October G, 18V7 his wife brought a suit for divorce against him, stating hi her petition that he had left her already for severnJ months [while, really, he had been absent but seven days, from September 29, to October G,] and had abandoned her entirely, that he had ill-treated her and been con- victed and sentenced to an infamous [)'au:shment, etc. She had ex- pected that he would not answer her petition and that she might obtain against him a judgement by default. But, although under those circumstances a f^eparation from^lier ought to have been desir- able to him, yet he deemed it his duty to defend himself as the ac. cusations concerLing his conduct towards her, were utterly false, and because of his unjust conviction, lie answered her petition ac- cordingly, but she, conceiving that she had no ''legal" cflisfl fur a divorce, determined to manufacture one h[i putting up a job by which to reach the desired end. With the assistance of her moiher and that of policeman Rapp — one of her paramours — she carried out, on the evening of October 31, 1877, the infernal plot she had concocted. AVhen on that evening Mr. vu.j- Werthern after one umnth's labor had received the wages he had earned by the sweat of his brow, and repaired home to offer to his wife the means for her and her child- ren's support, he was received by her in a most provoking, abusive and brutal manner. He turned back, intending to go away again, but that would have crossed her plans. As preconcerted, the moment he approached she dispatched her daughter Mary Stetefelt to the police station, while she detainee^ him until the expected and pre-arranged arrival from the station of her paramour — policeman "Rapp." Therefore, she changed her tactics and coaxed him to stay and sit down, as she wanted to have a sf[uare talk with him. This ho did, conversing about indifferent matters until she, thinking the time for her lover approach to have arrived, abused him again, and when once more he attempted to leave, she like a fury suddenly seized him by the collar of his coat and shouted Justily : "Murder! Police! Watch !" • This was the cue for her mother to appear suddenly on the stage, coming from the adjoining room, armed with a poker. With this — G — weapon .she unmercifully belabored bcr son-in-law while his wife held him with a firm clutch, shouting all the while: ''Police ! Murder!'' In her impatience this female fiend had commeficed too soon, the police had not arrived yet, and Mr. von Werlhern ^ccceded finally in wresting the poker from the old fury's hands and threw it through the door, whereupon that she-tiger seized a large carving-lcnije and extingHlshcd ihe light. Again Mr. von Werthern felt the clutches of his wife on him, but by a sudden jerk he freed himself from her and thus succeeded in making his escape from death by the hands of his mother-in-law. He went at once to the police stanon applying for protection, but instead of finding that, he was arrested by those police mffians acting in concert with those degraded women. On|ibe day following, November 1st, his wife falsely swore to an affidavit, charging him with ''assault and battery with attempt to kill." [On that very same day she and her like-wise perjured mother — good and pious Catholics that they were — bad gone to confession, and on tbe day after went to communion.] This affidavit w\ns then also, in form of a supplementary petition, added to her original petition tor divorce. This diabolic plan was so well carried through that it was al- most sure of success. But even the most cunning criminals often overlook a trifle by which they are detected finally. So it proved to be in this instance. . The plotting woman forgot to close the outside shutters, and it being night and light burning inside, there were witnesses who had observed th« whole fracas from the outside. Great was therefore her consternation when [on February 1 and 5, 1878] her divorce case was being tried, and those witnesses, unim- peachable for their veracity, gave their testimony. Moreover, she had stated in her affidavit that her husband had attempted to throw her into the well. She had boasted of it, on that very first of No- vember, to a lady friend, whe i the latter reminded her that nobody would believe it, as the well "was covered with planks nailed to the box. Nothing daunted, that criminal woman fore off a few planks so as to give a show to her tale. This so much disgusted that lady thai she likewise appeared as awiiness. Already steeped in perjury, the woman swore that she could not have said such a thing to that lady as she had not even seen her on that very day, when — lo ! four other unimpeachable witnesses appeared, who stated under oath that ihey had noticed her on that particular morning [it being All Saints Day] luiving haU an hour's conversation with that lady. The miserable wife was proven perjurious on the whole line and Judge Pardee dismissed the case with horror and disgust at such depravity and condemned her to the costs. Under such circumstmces no reconciliation was possible, and i)n ^Tay 1S78 Mr. von Werthern tiled a petition for divon^f, charging his wife with a too close intimacy with the priest of her church, with adultery, visiting houses of assignation, living in open concubinate with other men, etc., and the trial was taxed for June 28, 1878. And now Mr. Frank Roder — alias Franz Roeder, the %ell-to- do wholesale wine and liquor merchant — enters the scene. Being the brother of that miserable wife, and fearing the disgrace the ex- posure of that suit would bring on the "highl!/ respectable" Roder's family, he preferred the ruin of an innocent man. Being well aware of the nature of that unjust sentence ia 187G, he had ^Ir. von AVerthern re-arrested un'der the plea that Governor Kellogg's pardon never had been confirmed by the Senate and that, therefore, Mr. von Werthern should serve out his original sentence of one year's confinement in the State prison. ^ While the latter was in the Parish prison, Mr, Frank Roder sent to him the "notorious ex-Recorder Henry Heidexhain, with the proposition to have him released if he would withdraw his divorce suit. To this Mr. von Werthern finally consented and wrote to Judge Pardee to that effect. This was all the ''high respectable'' Roder family wanted. Once the divorce suit withdrawn, Mr. von Werthern was no more to be feared, and with diabolic treachery they concluded to annihilate him. On the following day Mr. Frank Roder demanded through his mouthpiece — the notorious Henry Heidenhain — new and such degrading conditions that Mr. von Werthern refused to entertain them. The unjust sentence, after an elapse of two years, and after it had been changed by the former Governor was carried into execution. The "highly respectable" Mr. Frank Roder, after having ex- — 8 — tracted from hi.s brother-in-law, uudcr false prelcncc, the withdrawal of his divorce suit, then left hiai mercilessly to his fate. The case was finally brought to the notice of Governor Nicholls, who rendered a full pardon which the Senate in session unanmousJ// confirmed. The Governor afterward expn ssed t'"> Mr. von Werthern bis extreme regret that the inflexible law had not permitted him tu give the pardon before the Senate was in session. , As a further vindication of Mr. von AVerthern, the remarks of two of our Senators, made irir-tbe open session of the Senate, in Jan- uary 21, 1879, may be cited here. Senator Kexker, in speaking against the ''vagrant law," saii : "As an evidence to what extremes the law can go, 1 would refer to the (^se of II. von Wen hern, whose pardon has been confirmed within 1 he past hour . . .Yon Werl hern bad worked industriously, and faithfully served his employer, That employer had not paid him his just salary for many long months, until the employer owed von Werl hern six hundred dollars. Afrer pressing the employer re- peatedly for the amount due him, the latter at length gave him a check for fifty dollars, tellingi'bim to retain twenty-live dollars and return the other twenty five. Von Werthern received ihe whole amount and told the employer that he [the clerk] could ksep the whole and deduct that amount from what he [the employer] owed him. The employer then had von Werthern arrested, etc." Senator Breadx, speaking in favor of the ''vagrant law," said : " The case of von AVerthern was unfortunate, it was a mis- iale'' Thus ]\lr. von AA^f^rt.hern is entirely rehabilitated, his integrit\ re-established, and his honor remains unsullied. But what can be said of the woman who shrinks at no means to rid herself of her husband, in order to satisfy her beastly lust freely and without hindrance wiih-Ktlher men ! And what of the " prominent and highly respectable " merchant who resorts to the basest of means to suppress the exposure of tht- crime of his sister ? A HIGHLY RESPECTAHLK FAillLY THIS, INDEED. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY Los Angeles This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. ■S juN'^f.yM"" JWNy >m FormL9 — 15m-10,'48(B1039)444 THE LIBRARY UNIVEKSITY (JfT mJJBMmmA UCSOinHtKNHll.lONAL I lUHAHY I aml AA 001 265 798 7 PLEA«^^ DO NOT REMOVE THIS BOOK CARD I ^xNtUBRARYO^ L 007 056 239 2 O H ^} o ^K!i'0JriV3J0 University Research Library