UNHAPPY MARRIAGES.

Auckland Star, Volume LI, Issue 206, 28 August 1920, Page 7

UNHAPPY MARRIAGES.

STORIES OF KLEPTOMANIACS. MIDNIGHT ESCAPADES. SOLDIER'S FAITHLESS WIFE. Kleptomaniacs figured in two of three undefended divorce suits heard before Mr. Justice Stringer at the Supreme Court to-day. A silent husband, who never spoke to his wife, never took her out, and who came homo late at night after mysterious nocturnal expeditions, was described by Edith Constance Cameron (Mr. Singer), who sought a divorce from William Arthur Cameron, chef, Taihape. on the ground of desertion. Tho petitioner stated that the marriage, took place in October, 191G, in Auckland, and a home was set up at Taihape. The respondent was a kleptomaniac, and under cover of darkness brought home a-31 kinds of stolen goods, lie was convicted for theft. Petitioner could not live any longer with him, and left him in March, 1917. A brother of respondent corroborated, and said he did not own the respondent aa _ brother. A decree wa_ granted. SOLDIER LOSES HIS WIFE. ' "Married in May. rue it for aye,' proved to be an adage applicable to the matrimonial venture of William Finlay Goode (Mr. Singer), which he entered upon 0:1 May 10, 1910. Coode sought a divorce from his wife, Jessie Cameron, on the ground of her alleged adultery with Frederick Mecske, of Devonport, who was named as corespondent. With an air of weariness the petitioner, who seemed to have difficulty in stilling' a prolonged series of yawns, told his Honor that in 11)14. his wife wanted to live in Port Chalmers, beside her parents, whereas he preferred a country life. Consequently the home j was broken up, and the two children j were placed in an institution. He went to the war, and on his return had some difficulty in tracing his wife. Ultimately he found her living at Devonport with the co-respondent. She had assumed the name of Mrs. Mecske, and petitioner's children, who were with her, had also adopted that name. His wife had a baby, now 15 months old, of which he was not the father. Meeskc told him that he first met the respondent at Port Chalmers, and had been living with her for about four years, while she was drawing petitioner's allotment money. Tho children did not know their .father, and petitioner thought it better to leave them until they became acquainted with him, and until he had obtained their custody from the Court. His Honor said he would leave the children where they were, and an application for custody could be made later. The petitioner said he did not want to mention thegfaet, but while his wife had been supposed to be living happily with tho co-respondent she had been convicted for theft. His Honor: That docs not look very promising. Mr. Cahill, who appeared for the respondeat in regard to the question of custody, said the circumstances were very peculiar. It was a case of kleptomania. Unfortunately he could not meantime- bring forward ■ medical- evidence, as the doctor concerned was not available. His Honor said tjh e children had been so long with the mother that he would not alter the position at present. A decree nisi was pronounced, the eustodv of the children to be dealt with in three months. HE FOUND AN EMPTY SHOP. A suspicious wife who dij not raise objections to her husband paying attention to another woman, because she considered her protests would, have been useless and would only have resulted in quarrels, secured a decree on the ground of his misconduct. The petitioner was Hilda Collinson (Mr. W. J. Gatenby) and her husband was Timothy Collinson. Petitioner said she was married in 1909, and lived some miles from Whangaroa. She had slight suspicions that her husband was misconducting himself at Kaeo with a girl who lived there with her grandmother. The respondent at first spoke disparagingly of the young woman, but subsequently changed his tune. He took her to dances and visited her home. Later the parties changed their residence to Papatoetoe.hcr husband going to Kaeo on a bushfelling contract. There he secured a tailor's shop, then vacant, which he furnished as a bach, taking bedding from the home. Petitioner received three anonymous letters, as a result of which she made inquiries, and ascertained that her husband and the girl were sleeping in the shop, "not continuously, but whenever it suited them both." When taxed with misconduct, the respondent ultimately made certain admissions. A year ago the petitioner bought a 20-acre farm, to which she | removed the. furniture, the cattle, tho poultry, and everything else in the home. His Honor: And the children? Petitioner: Yes. | A decree was granted. DEFENDED DIVORCE CASE. Further evidence wan grven before Mr. Justice Cooper and a jury in the defended divorce petition by Mitchell (Mr. Hall Skelton), railway employee, against Sarah Ann Mitchell (Mr. Singer), on the ground of her alleged misconduct with Hugh Croskery, I tablet porter, for whom Mr. Singer also appeared. The respondent said her domestic troubles arose at Paeroa owing to her husband's bad language. When they removed to Araiiiwi her husband was on friendly terms with Croskery, and it was on his suggestion that she helped to nurse the co-respondent when he had influenza. Croskery was a consumptive, and when witness was seen with her arm round him she was raising him in bed to relieve a violent tit of coughing. She denied misconduct with the co-respondent. Cross-examined by Mr. Hall Skelton, respondent denied that she had any arrnngement to meet the co-respondent when she left home. When her husband visited her ut the co-respondent's house he had a revolver in his possession. The case is proceeding.