During the first six years of territorial life many special divorce decrees may be found in the Nebraska laws; and they are invariably expressed in the curt and summary style peculiar to such legislation throughout the country, no reference usually being made to causes or to alimony.[357] At the same time Kansas was having a similar experience. One divorce petition was granted by the assembly in 1857, three in 1858, eight in 1859, while in 1860 the number suddenly rose to forty-three; for this was the "last chance" before the constitutional prohibition of 1859 went into effect.[358] Previous to 1847 Iowa was still more indulgent. Year after year appeals were made to the assembly for relief. Sometimes the intention appears to be to deny the defendant the privilege of further wedlock; as in 1840, when a decree was granted to dissolve the marriage contract, "so far as relates to the said Harriet Williams," who is allowed to change her name. Sometimes a partial divorce is sanctioned, as when the marital bond between John Philips and Nancy his wife was "so far dissolved as to permit the said parties to live separate and apart from each other." In this case the woman was given power to sue and be sued, and was allowed to retain the children. In 1841-42 eleven more legislative decrees were granted. The next year saw nineteen petitions combined in one bill, which was passed over the governor's veto by a two-thirds vote. The last examples occur in 1846, the year when Iowa was admitted to the Union as a state, and when the usual constitutional interdict appears.[359] [357] Here is an example: "The bonds of matrimony between Obediah J. Niles and Hannah M. Niles shall be and the same are hereby dissolved."--_Laws and Resolutions_, I, 373 (act of Feb., 1857). For other cases see _ibid._, 569, 570 (two cases, 1858), 653-55, 656 (three cases, 1860), 766, 767 (two cases, 1861). On Jan. 23, 1856, six petitions in one bill were referred to the judge of the district court for the first judicial district with power to dissolve marriage: _ibid._, 300. [358] _Private Laws of Kan._ (1860), 232-54. For other cases see _ibid._ (1858), 10-12 (three cases); and _ibid._ (1859), 41-45 (eight cases). [359] _Cf._ _Laws of Ia._ (1840), 12; _ibid._ (1840-41), 7, 12; _ibid._ (1841-42), 3, 11, 13, 28, 30, 31, 66, 73, 94, 95 (eleven cases); _ibid._ (1842-43), 82-84 (nineteen cases); _ibid._ (1845-46), 42, 48, 51, 52, 61, 72, 79 (eleven cases). The practice existed also in Idaho,[360] Montana,[361] and Oregon.[362] On the Pacific coast, however, Washington is the chief offender. Beginning with three cases in 1858 and one in 1859, the number mounts to fifteen in 1860, seventeen in 1861, fifteen in 1862, and sixteen in 1863; while after this date the session laws are silent on the subject.[363]