A PECULIAR CASE.

Bruce Herald, Volume LV, Issue 62, 14 August 1919, Page 5

A PECULIAR CASE.

HUSBAND WHO STABBED HIS WIFE GETS DIVOECE.

Although in-a moment of passion he stabbed his'w'ifo and suffered imprisonment for tho deed, Charles Norton Pickard, wiio wears tho Mons ribbon and Star, was successful in his application to Mr Justice Coleridge for the dissolution of Ms marriage on tho ground of tho misbehaviour of his wife, Louise Emma, with Charles Sawyer, cited as co-respondent, says 'Lloyd's News.' There was no defence to the suit, but Pickard had to ask for tho discretion of the Court to be exercised in his favour in consequence of his act of cruelty. The marriage was in 1903. Trouble arose owing (it was said) to the mother-in-law getting tho wife to leave her homo. Afterwards, when tho husband wont and saw his wife to demand, an explanation of her conduct, sho made accusations against him, which he, denied. In a moment of frenzy he picked up a knife and struck her with it.

For his offence lie was sent to penal servitude at the Old Bailey in 1905, and while in prison ho arranged to rejoin his wife. When he was released, - however, she refused to leave the man Sawyer, with whom she was living; " Ethel Mary Gray, sister of Mrs Piekard, said the latter from September, 1908; till 1911 lived with Sawyer. Mr Justice Coleridge i That was while the-husband was in prison, Mr Cox-Mcceh (counsel): No, : my Lord. Ho was sentenced in 1905, and in consequence of his good conduct released in 'Soptcmfter, 1907. Piekard, recalled, said he had b«sn twice in the Army—before the trouble with his wife—and rejoined in 1934.* His discharges wore marked 'very good.' In a letter written to him in 1916"his wife said:— 'Dear Charlie,—You heard the other day I was anxious to get a divorce, as I ain tired of going on like this any longer. ' 'I think it would bo better for both of us if wc were free. As you know, I have been living with a man for nine years, and have a little girl, and would

like to get married for her sake.' More recently she wrote: — 'Well, Charlie, I have; forgotten the past a long time ago. I have been away from you for fourteen years now, and I want you ! to understand we can bo nothing to each other. So please, go on with the case. . ... For my little girl's sake let it (tho divorce case) go on.' t His Lordship said it was .not unnatural that the wife, in view of her husband's treatment, should seek happiness elsewhere. The Court was reluctant to favour a husband who had been guilty of such conduct; because it ivas impossible to be sure that the conduct did not largely conduce to the wife's frailty. Here both parties desired a divorce. The wife wished to regularise her relationship with the corespondent, and to refuse a divorce decree nisi meant tying her to this nmn (petitioner) for the rest of her life or his. 'Perhaps my desire,' added tho judge, *to do the best I can for the happiness of the wife overcomes my scruples in regard to the decree I am about to pronounce.' Tho discretion of the Court would be exercised in favour of the husband, and a decree nisi pronounced.