A DIVORCE PETITION

Evening Post, Volume XCIV, Issue 118, 15 November 1917, Page 8

A DIVORCE PETITION

• ROSS AND HIS PATENTS. I To-day his Honour the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) heard a petition by Caroline Frances Antonia Ross for a dissolution of her marriage with John Ross, the grounds of the plea being that since 1910 he had failed Ito maintain her or her children, and was guilty of habitual drunkenness. * The petitioner in evidence stated that she was married in 1895, and there were j three children of the marriage. For four years and upwards her husband had failed to maintain her or' the children In 1909 she inherited £3500 under her mother's will. Ross was then a. telegraphist, . and after this he worked on for about six months, and then threw up his billet and went home to England with a patent telephone. For this purpose she gave him £300, and a man named Alalone went with him, the latter getting £300 from Boss's mother. While away in England Ross drew from her sums of £200 and £400. Becoming suspicious, she "went to England to see what he was "up to." She found that nothing had been done with the patents ; the duplicates were lost, and all the money 6pent Ross was away altogether for a "year and five months, and did not- attempt to workliving on her money. She was also at this time keeping the home in New Zealand going. Ross and she left England together, bnt, before doing so, she had to give him another £150 for a patent road macadamising machine He threatened to leave her if she did not do so. Back in New Zealand, nothing was done with the road machine. She had purchased a home in Christchurch .for £1050, but she did not know until later that his name was put in the deed as the purchaser. The house was eventually sold for £850, and she did not know where the money went, except £100 of it, which she got. In Auckland respondent was repeatedly drunk, and she had had a separation order from him for four years, during which time she had not lived with him. Ross, who had been to the front, was now on the land, on a section he had drawn in a ballot. While he was away, at the front she had! drawn an allotment from him of 3s per day, but had only got this after a lot of trouble and representations to the Defence Department. When she went to Auckland her money was all gone, and she had lost her home. ,■■ Corroborative evidence was given by a daughter of petitioner and Mrs X Fraser, and his Honour granted a rule nisi, to be made absolute in three months with costs on the lowest scale