DIVORCE CASE.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXI, Issue 63, 15 March 1900, Page 9

DIVORCE CASE.

His Honor Mr Justice Couolly tills morning heard a divorce action under the Divorce and Matrimonial 'Causes Act, lSr>7 and its amendments and the Divorce. Act, 1898. The. petitioner is John McLeotl. of Mongomii, engineer, rind, the respondent, Annie Allen Mcleod, now ol' Christchurch. Mr Fred Earl appeared for tlie petitioner. Kespoudeut was unrepresented.

The parties were, married at Suva, Fiji Islands, in ISB7, and the respondent deserted petitioner at Auckland in September, 1894. Respondent is said to be now residing in Melbourne. Petitioner asked that the marriage be dissolved on the grounds of desertion. Mr Earl said the parties had known

each other from childhood, and they ;became engaged in Auckland. respondent appeared to have regretted her marnng'e us soon as it was completed. Petitioner said he resided nnc'l co- ! habited with his wife at Suva, Fiji, 1 for about one year. There was no quarrel between them of any serious kind. The relations were, not as affectionate on the wife's side. Witness said on Iris side they were truly affectionate. Witness and his wife came back to Auckland, and they then went to Christchurch. Witness went first and his wife followed. Her mother, at that time, resided at Lyttelton, and she went there on a visit. She' remained there with her mother several months, and they all came back to ■xVucklniul. .including1 the mother. They then arranged to all live together in Auckland, and did so. lrp to this time, he had always provided for his wife. ; Later on they shifted to a place of .their own, apart from the mother, i which witness furnished, and they | lived together for some time. The 'ship witness was employed on was then shifted to Fiji. Witness went to Fiji in this vessel, leaving- his wife in ihe cottage, but later on she joined him. That broke up the home in 'Auckland. He remained in Fiji three or four months, ujul then they again returned to Auckland to her mother. Witness again provided means and he bought a residence, but she declined to live ia it. This was in September, 3 80-1. l Tp to this time they had lived as man and wife. A fortnight after this hi.< boat was ordered to Wellington. The boat would then not trade to Auckland. His wife said that she iwould not go to Wellington as she had jrio affection for him, and that he was

ignorant—not educated. His wife was a little better educated than he was. His wife gave no other reason why she would not go with him. She had never compJninw] to him of bad treatment, Bis wife repeatedly told him she had no affection for him. Before he left for Wellington his wife told him that she would not live with him again. He h:u! never met his wii'e but once since she left him. and then he was not sure abou! her. Fitl had nol spoken to her. She wroie lo him six: months ago, bill lie did not keep the lefler. The letter was written I'roin Auckland. His wife had never made a proposal by letter or otherwise to return to the' house. In further evidence petitioner said there had been jio issue of the marriage. To His Honor: His wife was 24 when he married her. His .Honor added he thought it was some young girl who pin-haps did not know her own mind. Witness, in reply To other questions by His Honor said his age was about !50 when 'he married. 11 is wife gave musical lessons. She had never applied to him for maintenance since she left him. Mrs Zenobia La inn- sn-icl the respondent was her daughter. The parties had been twice engaged, but it was broken off, She was in Lyttelton when they wove married. Tier daughter was always very reserved about the relations which existed between her and her husband. In 1594 she heard her daughter tell petitioner she would never live wiih him again, but gave no reason. At this time she was living with witness. Witness said she knew her daughter had no affection for Me.Leod- throughout. McjLeod, she thought, was always very fond of his wife, lie always treated her with respect, and provided for his wii'e. After Mci.eod went to Wellington, in j 1894 she went 1o stay with heY sister at Fiji. She came back <o Auckland and stopped with witness for three months, when .she went, to Cliristj church alone, and remained for six j months. She came back to witness, j a.nd remained with her iill six months ! ago. when she went to Melbourne. I She. was now in Christchurch, and gave j music, lessons and played out at different entertainments. About six months ■ ago her daughter was very ill, nud witness asked her daughter to send to AicLeod for £10 to go in. a nursing | home. McLeorl sent the £10 immejdiately. That was the only communication she knew of between them. Mrs Margaret Jane Taylor, of Auckland, deposed Mrs McLeod told her

that she left her husband because she did not care for him. His .Honor said that petitioner could take n decree nisi, with leave to apply for decree absolute after the expiration of three months.