A WIFE'S ALLEGATIONS.

Auckland Star, Volume LVII, Issue 142, 17 June 1926, Page 7

A WIFE'S ALLEGATIONS.

THE "STAR" BOARDER. DEFENDED DIVORCE ACTION. An unhappy marriage that extended over a period of 2S years was unfolded before Mr. Justice Stringer in the Supreme Court to-day in a defended divorce action brought by Alice Wilhelmina Grubb (Mr. J. F. W. Dickson) against William Drummond Grubb (Mr. Hogg). The grounds alleged were habitual drunkenness, cruelty, and desertion, but shortly after the start liis Honor said it was apparent that desertion was the only ground to be relied on. Petitioner stated that she was married on June 24. ISdS. She lived with her husband until February, 1022. Prior to that respondent had been drinking heavily. In January, 1022, he threatened her with a razor. Since 1001 he had been in the habit of comma: home every night in a drunken state. On the night of tne razor episode be came home very drunk and went to bed. At midnight, he came to witness holding a razor. He said he would "do" for her, but she eventually jiot him back to bed. On February 2:?.'1022. he left her. She applied twice for a separation order, but each time the magistrate refused to crr.mt it. For eleven months after lie left her be threw stones on the house to annoy her. He bad not maintained her since 1022.

To Mr. Hogg: Her husband did not ask her to got rid of a boarder. All lie had sai<l was: "Tt lias got to go." It was on nwoiint of jealousy. Witness was r>l years of age. The hoarder had been in the house for 25 years, having been taken there by her huaband when he was 17 years of age. She admitted this hoarder used to k!■-•.- her. but it was only like her own sons would do on point; to bed. This man had attended to her when she was ill ami her husband sat beside her in a drunken state. His Honor: I cannot 'see much harm in that, if h<- had been there since he was 17 years of ago. A married (laughter of the couple and i son also gave evidence. The respondent in evidence denied l>eing an habitual drunkard. He said he believed ho had reason, to leave his wife on account of her preference for the boarder. He had repeatedly told his wife flint cither the boarder or he must fro. She refused to turn the boarder out. so witness left her. He had wen this man and his wife kissing cadi other. The case is proceeding.