Step back into 1913, where the allure of Nevada's easy divorce requirements attracts desperate souls seeking freedom. Meet a woman on the brink, ready to escape her troubled marriage. As she navigates a web of aliases and political upheaval, a tragic confrontation with her estranged husband changes everything.

Was this desperate act a fight for her future, or a crime of passion?

---

TRANSCRIPT

We’re exploring the dramatic and tragic story of Ruth Nash, a woman caught in the web of Nevada's evolving divorce laws in the early 20th century.

It’s 1913. Ruth Nash's journey began in Los Angeles, where she made the bold decision to head to Central Nevada with her son, seeking a divorce from her husband, Herbert Nash. At that time, Nevada was gaining notoriety for its liberal divorce laws, attracting what many referred to as "divorce tourism." These lenient laws, coupled with minimal residency requirements, offered a quick escape for many unhappy spouses. For Ruth, this was a chance for a fresh start.

Ruth had arrived in Goldfield under the alias Mrs. Drew, working as a waitress. After moving around to escape her past, she had left her son with a family named McDonald while Herbert struggled to find them.

But just as Ruth arrived, political tensions were brewing. The Nevada Senate was preparing to vote on new legislation that could effectively ban the divorce industry. With the vote looming, Ruth felt an overwhelming sense of urgency. Would she be able to finalize her divorce before the laws changed?

Meanwhile, her estranged husband had tracked her down. Ruth was just learning about the impending changes to the divorce laws. In a moment that would alter both their lives forever, Ruth shot Herbert.

This shocking act followed five months of separation during which Ruth had taken their son without notifying Herbert. After the shooting, Herbert was rushed to the county hospital but sadly succumbed to his injuries a week later.

Was Ruth’s desperate act driven by fear of losing her chance for a divorce? The community was left questioning her motivations.

The grand jury heard testimonies from eyewitnesses, including County Commissioner Dan O’Keefe and driver Fred Immerman. They reported their accounts of the shooting and the circumstances leading up to it.

While she awaited the grand jury's decision, Ruth stayed with friends, her future hanging in the balance. Though she initially sought a divorce, her plans were now shrouded in uncertainty.

Ultimately, the grand jury found no true bill against Ruth, leading to her immediate release.

Was the grand jury making a statement in defiance of the pending anti-divorce bill? After all, Nevada’s liberal grounds for divorce offered economic opportunity for small communities like Goldfield, which was perhaps a destination for divorce tourists.

Meanwhile, as Ruth’s case unfolded, Nevada Senators were debating the divorce bill. Senator Horsey argued that the divorce industry was driving away potential residents and that the laws needed to be stricter. He insisted the bill should take effect immediately rather than waiting until January 1, 1914.

His argument was clear: Nevada needed to shed its reputation for lax divorce laws to improve its moral standing. Senator Kendall from Nye County echoed this sentiment, emphasizing the need for reform and a focus on the state’s natural resources instead of divorce tourism.

Eventually, the attempts at increased restrictions on divorce in Nevada fell through. The state ended up with easy divorce requirements at a time when most states discouraged divorce through complex legal barriers. In fact, Nevada bucked the national trends, like it did on many issues, and lowered the residency requirements even more.

But you have to question what was in the minds of the lawmakers trying to limit personal freedoms like this in Nevada. After all, Nevada would later become famous for its personal freedoms.

How would outlawing divorce have affected individuals trapped in abusive marriages? Would they have had any recourse for escaping their situation?

How would the stigmatization of divorce have affected individuals who were unhappy in their marriages? Would it have led to increased social isolation?

Ruth Nash’s story is a poignant reminder of the personal and societal struggles surrounding divorce, especially in a time of changing laws and social norms. It highlights the desperation some faced in their quest for freedom and the complex web of emotions that can lead to tragic outcomes.

---

Also check out:

Tonopah Daily Bonanza. (1913, April 30). Retrieved from https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn86076142/1913-04-30/ed-1/seq-1/

Tonopah Daily Bonanza. (1913, March 12). Retrieved from https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn86076142/1913-03-12/ed-1/seq-1/

Tonopah Daily Bonanza. (1913, February 18). Retrieved from https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn86076142/1913-02-18/ed-1/seq-1/

Intermountain Histories. (n.d.). Making the divorce capital of the world. Retrieved from https://www.intermountainhistories.org/items/show/346?tour=31&index=0

Check out our full podcast archive here.