WANTED £10,000.

Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 280, 26 November 1928, Page 9

WANTED £10,000.

WIFE'S DEMAND OF HUSBAND. ABORTIVE NEGOTIATIONS. PETITION IN DIVORCE. * That his wife had ideas of Ms financial position which were altogether wrong was the statement of Colin Findlay Gordon (Mr. Fawcett and Mr. Hanipson), civil engineer, who appeared at the Supreme Court this morning before Mr. Justice Frazer in support of a petition for the dissolution of his marriage with Marion Gordon (Mr. Northcroft). "My wife asked for .£IO,OOO and I could not pay it," said the petitioner. "That was at her solicitor's office in Sydney, when we were discussing the question of divorce. Of course, negotiations ended with that request." The parties were married in Ceylon in February, 1912. They have two children. Towards the end of 1913, said the petitioner in evidence, his wife left him and went to'" Australia. The trouble arose over petitioner's mother-in-law, who had been living with them and with whom he . had differences. Finally he informed his wife that her mother must leave their home. Respondent went to Australia, where her mother was, and she had lived in Sydney ever since. His Honor: How often have you seen her since she left you?— Twice, in 1919. Petitioner said he had discussions with his wife on those occasions—the terms of maintenance in case of divorce. There had been no intention in 1913 to remain permanently separated, but the separation continued over a space of years. By 1919 both parties had. a definite intention to live apart. His Honor: There was not desertion, but separation?— Yes. Intends to Live in Rotorua. Claiming that he had given proof of his desire to establish a permanent domicile in New Zealand, petitioner said he had found the climate suitable and had been in the Dominion for a total period of 25 months. He had secured a property at Rotorua, which he proposed to make his place of residence. He would leave next month for Ceylon to complete railway construction works, which would be finished next March. Petitioner said that as a civil engineer he had been engaged in numerous Eastern countries over a period of 30 yearg His salary, rbout £400 a year at the time of his marriage with the respondent, had risen to £1200 a year in 1924but was reduced by 50 per cent in times of sick leave. Hβ had been engaged largely in malaria districts. In 1926 petitioner wrote to the respondent suggesting she should return to him. ♦ Mr. Northcroft produced subsequent correspondence showing the wife's desire to come to live with her husband in New Zealand, and inquiring as to the prospects for the children. Petitioner said ™ «* the time of the separation in 1913 he did not wish a reconciliation. His discussions with respondent in 1919 were with a view of instituting proceedings in divorce. "I did not want my wife back," said petitioner to Mr. Hampson, under re.examination, his attitude upon receiving respondent's letters in 1926. Dr. Bertram, of Rotorua, gave evidence in corroboratioiF of petitioner's statement that he inteded to live at Rotorua. He said that a period of over 20 years was an unusually long one to spend in malaria district* in the tropics, and the petitioner's health had been seriously impaired. Mr. Northcroft submitted the real domicile of the petitioner was Ceylon where he had been born and where his married life began. "Another Reno?" New Zealand, 6a id Mr. Northcroft, had been selected by petitioner as his Place of domicile apparently because of the provisions under the divorce law for obtaining the dissolution of a marriage ■No other Dominion offered similar Drovisions. * (smiling): Do you suggest New Zealand is becoming another Reno? Mr. Northcroft: The Court is bound to scrutinise the motives actuating a litigant in this position. Mr. Hampson said the petitioner's purchase of a property at Rotorua waj proof that he had abandoned Ceylon as his domici e, and had made New Zealand his domicile of choice.

Mr. Northcroft said the petitioner had apparently found a convenient state of the law not applicable in Ceylon, and asserted he had a domicile here for no other reason than to bring himself within the peculiar provision of the law which made it possible to obtain a divorce on grounds of mutual separation. His Honor reserved his decision. Other Petitions. Peter Angus Mitchell ;Mr. Singer) sought a decree nisi against Amy Isobel Mitchell, whom he married in June 1912. Last August petitioner obtained an order for the restitution of conjugal rights, which respondent failed to comply with. A decree nisi was granted. George Lewis Payne (Mr. J. J. Sullivan) was granted an order for the restitution of conjugal rights against Evan Amelia Payne. The marriage took place in January, 1925, at the registrar's office, Kensington, London. Petitioner said his wife left him in April, 1926. On many occasions he had endeavoured to get her back,, and had written her numerous letters but without aval. Amelia Chritftana Mabel Lawn (Mr Matthews) was granted a decree nisi against John Henry Lawn, on ground? of adultery. The marriage took place ia March, 1917'