DIVORCE OPPOSED.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVIII, Issue 128, 1 June 1937, Page 8

DIVORCE OPPOSED.

DEFENCE BY WIFE.

LOANS TO HUSBAND.

CRUELTY ALLEGED

The action for divorce lirouuht by Francis Montgomery .Moore .Ritchie (Mr ajiaiiM I lara Kitehie (Mr (ioldstine i in tlu> Supreme Court yesterday was continued liefore JMr. Ju.-tice Smith to-day. Tin; petition is on the grounds of separation following upon an order made in tile Magistrate's C ourt in April, 1931.

SiiiLrcr i

When t)u- cast' resumed this morning Mi'. Singer asked leave to amend t lie petition to include a charge that responilent had wilfully and without just cause deserted petitioner in .March, 1 !K> I.

Mr. (ioidstine objected, contending' that it raised a new course of action. The pot it ion had been based upon separation and he had confined his cross separation and he had confined his crossexamination of the petitioner to the question of separation.

His Honor said he thought Mr. (ioidstine was right and refused to allow the petition to be amended. Case for Respondent. Outlining the ease for the respondent Mr. Coldstine said the evidence would show that so far from the petitioner being a model husband he. treated her very differently from what might be expected of a model husband. His statement that lie had paid her C> 10/ a week until the slump came, when he reduced it to £5, would be denied by Mrs. Ritchie, who would say she had not received more than £4 10/ a week.

At the time she married siic had assets worth about £2000. Three times petitioner had borrowed sums of £100 from her and once £128, a total of £425. He had also taken out an insurance policy on the furniture in his own name, but she later insisted upon him transferring it to her. The amount he paid on the policy he deducted from her weekly allowance.

Respondent would give evidence that on the last occasion he borrowed from her he got her to sign a blank withdrawal slip and give him the bank passbook. It was not till proceedings were instituted against him for the return of the bankbook and other property that petitioner returned the goods, and the wife then found that he had drawn £100 and not about £20 as he told her lie intended to draw.

Mr. Goldstine dealt with alleged instances of cruelty which respondent would relate, also failure to maintain, and concluded by saving that when Ritchie found that all Mrs. Ritchie's ready cash was gone she was apparently of no further use to him. He then took to going out at night, leaving her alone in the house, showing no concern for her whatever when, because of her illhealth. she needed the care and attention of a husband.

The respondent gave evidence detailing alleged incidents of cruelty. The climax was reached, she said, one mornins. While they were in the garden, he dropped some dirt down her back and turned the hose upon her. She went inside, packed some of her belongings and left home to go to live with a sister.

The case is proceeding.