DIVORCE COURT

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 55, 28 November 1919, Page 9

DIVORCE COURT

ANOTHER BIG LIST NINETEEN DISSOLUTIONS His Honour the Chief Justice (Sir S)bert Stout) continued the hearing of vorce suits yesterday. v WILLIAMS Y. AVILLIAMS. AValter Percy. AVilUams, for whom Mr. J. M. Dale appeared, Bought a dissolution of his marriage with Essie Elsie Grace AVilUams on the grounds of misconduct. The parties were married on September 25, 1907. and there were several children of the marriage. The petitioner went away to the front in March, (1916, and roturned in February this year.' In consequence, of w-hat he had beard while away he had not seen hia wife sinco his return. Tho children were staying with his mother. Evidence was also given by Bert William Munn, private detective, and Mary Elizabeth Noon, boardingliouse-keeper, who stated that Mrs. AVilliams and the co-respond-ent stayed at her house for about six months nnd passed aa man- and w.ife. A decree nisi was granted, to be made absolute in three months, and costs were given against the co-rospondent. BULLEN V. BULLEN. ' Mr. P. AV. Jackson appeared for Annie Anita Bullen, who sought a dissolution of Tier marriage with Percy Stewart Bullen on the grounds of misconduct. Tho parties were married on Oc- ( tober 21, 1911, and there were threo children, two of whom were in, a homo, end petitioner had'the youngest child with, her. The parties lived together-' until about'lß months ago, when the respondent told her to go away, that he was tired of her. The petitioner went away, thinking that her husband would want her back. She was away for .two , months whon she heard that he had been misconducting himself. She taxed him with this, but forgave, him, and continued to live with him. She had to leave him again, and discovered that he was still misconducting himself. .She taxed hei husband with misconduct, and he admitted this, and later made the admission in writing. AValter Dinnie, private detective, also gave evidence, and His Honour granted a decree nisi,- to be made absolute in. three'months, with costs against the respondent. BRAMLEY Y. BRAMLEY. ' Misconduct was theground of the-peti-tion of Thomas Bramley; who sought a i dissolution of his marriage with Mary Jane Bramley.' Mr. R. H. AVebb appeared for the petitioner; The parties were married on March 30, 1911, at AVellington and lived at Johnsonvilje, where the petitioner' wns farming.- They kept n. lodger named Joseph Baretta. On May 23, 1917, the lodger returned to the house drunk and.the petitioner' ordered Mm to leave the house as soon as possible. Tiro days, later, when witness returned home ho found that his wife had gone and so had the lodger. Later he discovered that they were living together. in Christchurch. Corroborative evidence having been given, -a' decree nisi was granted, to bo made absolute-in three. . months, with, costs' against the co-re-. >-' epondent. CORKE V. CORKE. Mr. T. Neave appeared for William James Corke, who petitioned for a dissolution of his marriago with Violet Gwendoline Corke on the ground of misconduct. The parties were married on No- • Veniber 12, 1913, and lived at Wellington and at Featherston. On January the respondent left the' petitioner and wentto live at Kent Terrace with a man named : M'Cann., leaving' her two children with the petitioner. Later the petitioner;--in company with Sergeant H. Butler, visited Kent Terrace with the object of getting his wife to retnrn to her children. She retad to dp this. The reeoondent and co-respondent then went to Pongaroa, and the respondent later went to Auckland, where she was served with the divorce petition by the petitioner.The respondent then admitted that she was about to give birth to. a child of which M'Cann was the father. Sergeant Butler ,stated that when he went to the house'with the petitioner, the respondent paid she was the'wife of M'Cann. His Honour granted a decree nisi, to 'be made absolute in three months, with costs against the co-respondent. • AVHITTA A*.' WHITTA. Alfred A'ivian AVhitta sought a dissolution of his marriage with .Uabel Whitta on the ground of misconduct. Mr. F. D. Sargent, of Christchurch, appeared for the petitioner. The marriago of the parties took place on June 24,' 1914, and they lived in Auckland... The petitioner went to the war in September, 1914, and returned in 1918. During his absence his wife wrote to him. and in one letter she said she was having a good time/ On his return to New Zealand he, heard certain things respecting the conduct of his - , wife. Alex. ; Lawson, boardinghousekeeper, said that respondent and the corespondent stayed at his boardinghouso for about six months, passing as Mr. and Mrs. Myers.. A decree'nisi was granted, to be made absolute in three months. v - JAMES V. JAMES. . Mr. A. M. Salek appeared for Susan May James, who petitioned for a dissolution of her marriage with Albert Edward James on the ground of desertion. Tho petitioner stated that she married the respondent in 1901, and lived in Wellington. Soon after marriage the respondent took to drinking, and had illtreated her., In. 1913 they went to Tailape with their two children, and while there the petitioner was obliged to leave the boardinghouse because she had no means. For Jfour nights she, with her two sons, had to sleep in a shed in the Bchool-grounds. In 1914 she obtained a maintenance order against her husband, but there was in 1915 a total of ,658.155. in arrears,, In 1916 respondent came to her house in a drunken condition, and . petitioner appealed to tho polioe nnd eventually she obtained a separation order. The respondent went to the war in 191(3. enlisting as a single man, but the petitioner appealed to the Defence authorities and.was allowed ss. Gd. per day for herself and children. She had maintained herself for som? time. Corroborative evidence was. tendered, and a decree nisi was granted, to be mads absolute in three months, with costs against the respondent. ASHLEY V. ASHLEY. Misconduct was the ground of the petition of Catherine May Ashley, woo sought a. dissolution of her! marriage with Robert John Ashley. Mr. H. F. O'Leary appeared for the petitioner. The parties wero married at Walton-on- ! names, and a week after marriago the respondent returned to New Zealand. Jen months later the petitioner followed lier husband, and lived with him in the , £ omi , nl . on , f °r about three weeks. She then left him because he was continually threatening her. This was in August, 1917, and sho had maintained herself since, bho met him on several occasions and talked to hiiff about his conduct. He suggested divorce, but she -said she had no grounds. Later she discovered that he was misconducting himself. Corroborative evidence as to tho respondent . being seen with andther womnn .in '.\ I'oardinghouso under very compromising conditions having been given, a decreo nisi was granted, to be made absolute in tliree months, with costs against the respondent. M'CONACHY V. M'CONACHY. Margaret M'Conaehy, for whom Mr AV. Perry appeared, petitioned for a dis--5? 1 ": I *"} °f llor , marriage with James David M Conachy on the ground of misconduct. Tho marriago took place in November, 1915, and the parties lived together until January, 1918, when petitioner obtained nn order for separation nnd maintenance. Tho petitioner ' received two letters from the respondent, in which he admitted misconduct. Evidence in corroboration was given, and a decreo nisi was granted, to be -made absolute in three months, with costs against tho respondent. SIBREE V. SIBREE. Mr. T. Neavo appeared for I Charles Sibree, who petitioned for a divorce- from his wife on tho ground of misconduct. Tho marriage took place in April, 1895, and there wore two children, In June,

1911, his wife left him and went to I've with a man named Henry Wilson. Walter Dinnie, private detective, gave corroborative evidoncc, and His Honour grouted a decree nisi, to be made absolute in threo months, with costs against the co-respondent... ROBERTS V. ROBERT. 1 ?. David Albert Rsberts, labourer,, for whom Mr. P. J. O'Regan appeared, petitioned for a divorce from his wife Lucy Martha Roberts on the ground of raisoonduct with Michael O'Connor. Tho marriace took place in.May, 1914, and there were no children. The lespondent. it was alleged, went to the races near Featherston with the co-respondent, and 6ubseauently stayed with him at the hotel.- , Evidence in corroboration was given, and a docree nisi was granted, to be- made absolute in three months, with costs against tho co^responoent. RAFFEL V. RAFFEL. Misconduct was the ground of the petition of Maggie May Raffel, who 60iight .n. dissolution, of her marriage with Simon Rnifol, an Assyrian storekeeper, at Wairoa/ Mr. P. AY.' Jackson appeared for the petitioner. Tho parties were married in July, 1909, at Wellington, and went to live at Wairoa. In September, 1914, petitioner left tho respondent because he became familiar with a Maori woman: The petitioner went back to Wairoa in September last, but did not livo with her husband, who was then living with tho Maori woman, who passed as his wife. Bert AV. Munns, private detective, gave corroborative 1 evidence, ami a decree- nisi was granted, to be made absolute, in three months, with costs asainst the respondent. PHILPOTT. V. PHILPOTT. Mr. P. AV. Jackson appeared for Richard Hamilton Philpott, who petitioned for divorce from his wife Beatrice Philnott, on the grounds of misconduct and habitual drunkenness. The marriage took place in Cormoall in June, 1900, and there was one child, a boy, now at college. In May or June, 1917, his wife left him. and went to To Kititi, from Auckland, where they had been living. The netitioner heard she was misconducting herself, and he went to To Kuiti with the object of getting her to return to Auckland. He. taxed her with misconduct, which- sho admitted. The affidavits filed corroborated the petitioner's statements, and a decree nisi was irranted, to be mace absolute in three i months. KINNIBURGH V. KINNIBURGH. Carolina lunniburgh, represented by Mr.. CM. Crombie, sought a dissolution of her marriage with John Herbert Kinuiburirh, on the ground of misconduct. The parties were married on August 23. 1909. and lived together until 1912. when tho respondent left her. There were three children of the marriage, but only two were living. The cetitioner. subsequently learned that the respondent was living with another woman, who passed, as his wife. Corroborative evidence of this was given, also 'as to the birth ana' registration of an illegitimate child. A decree nisi was irranted. to be moved absolute in three months, with costs against the respondent. BAGGARLEY. V. BAGGARLEY. ' Misconduct was also the ground of, the netition of Augustus Henry Baggarley for divorce from his wife Lilian Winifred Ba-ggarley. Mr. P. AV. Jackson appeared for the petitioner. The marriage took place in ISOli, and the parties lived at Carterton. In' August Inst the reSDOtident came to Wellington, but subseouentlv returned home very much intoxicated." She remained with her husband for a fortnight, and returned _ to Wellington; stating that she was going to nursn a friend. The petitioner came to AVellineton. later, and discovered that his .wife was living with a man named Rvan in.Taranaki Street. Ho bad done everything possible to care for his wife, but she was drinking heavily, and mirrored to be getting worse. /.Bert. AV. Muims. private detective, 'gave rorro-' liorative evio.ence, and a decree nisi was irranted. to be moved absolute, in three months, with costs against the co-re-snondent. ■ ' • : • V' QUILL V. QUJLL. '*'■•. Mr. P. W. Jackson appeared for Ethel Maud' Blanche Gertrude Quill, 'who soucbt a dissolution of her marriage with. John. Michael Quill on the ground of habitual drunkenness. The marriage took nlaee in 1907, and there were four children, but only one was alive. The reSnonoOnt, it was alleged, began drinking, scon after marriage, and scarcely ever worked! H° lived en his mother, who resided at Otnlci. His mother nrovided him with money to go to Dunedin to s't for the dental examination, but inftead of doing that he went on a drinking bout and never went n«nr th n examinere. He w<>nt to fch/» front in 191G and returned early this year. Tie was at pre-sent-working on the wharf.- Cnnw'-si- : t : vc evidence • was tendered, and His Honour granted a decree n : si, to bo made absolute in three months. MITCHELL V. MITCHELL. ' Mr.'C. A. H. Treadwell aripenred for I John Mitchell, who alleged misconduct as the ground-of his petition for divorce from his wife, Margaret Mitchell. Tho parties were marred lin England--in 1907, and came to Weiv Zealand in 1913. The petitioner went away with the Exoeditionnrv Force in Octo'ber, 19H, and returned in September last. While away the petitioner heard that his w:fe was imsooiiductingiierself with a man named Campbell; a labourer. On his return he took steps to ascertain the facts, and both the respondent end co-resnondent acknowledged .misconduct. Evidence in support, Was -given, and a decree nis" was granW, to be made absolute in three months. ' POORB V. POORE. ' Mary Eliznlioth Poore. represented by Mr. }i. F. o'Lwiry. sonorht a dissolution of her marriage- with Frederick William Poo.re on the ground of dessrtion. The narties were marred in June. 1908, -and there, were two children, Tho parties lived together in various places in New. Zealand, and while in Christen iirch. the : r home was sold up nnd petitioner came to Wellington and lived with her mother. Her husband followed her, and two dnyi later went away to Sydney, and she had not seen him since. .She afterwards discovered that there was a warrant out for h'« arrest on a crim'nal charge. In IW, '•'"> wf? assisted into a husityss, and sho had since managed to maintain herself and her two children. She had not received any maintenance from her ■•uf.band s ! nce he left her in 1911, A decree n'i=n was. granted, to be made absolute in three months. ASTON V. ASTON. Mr. R. Kennedy represented Ethel Jean Aston, who petitioned for divorce from her husband, Tliomns Henry Aston, on the ground of misconduct. The. parties were married in Auckland in 1911, and there was one child. Petitioner learned somo time later thnt her husband was misconducting himself, and that ho was living with it woman in a liou.se at Terrace Gardens. Tho , petitioner was present when Ihe respondent was served 'with the summons in the present case. The tenant of the hoiifi? where the respondent and co-respondent occupied n room gave corroborative- evidence, and a decree nisi was granted, _ to bo made absolute in threo months,' with costs against tho respondent. NORMS A r . NORMS. Stanley Herbert Norris, for whom Mr. P. AV. Jackson appeared, sought dissolution of his marriage with Florence May Norris, on the grounds of misconduct, Charles Berry being' named as tho co-re.-pondont. The marriago took place in August, 1915, and there were no children. The petitioner left for France in 1915 and returned last month. His wife met him on his return nnd confessed that she had misconducted herself, and had given birth to an illegitimate child, of which the co-respondent was the father. The petitioner saw the co-resp:mdeiit, who admitted guilt. Evidence in support was given and a decree nisi was granted, to be made ntooluto in. three months, with costs against tho co-respondent. AUCKLAND CASE. By Telograph—Press Association. Auckland, November 27. In tho divorce enso Ilcdder v. Ilodder and Ifwersen (husband's petition), Hoddor was granted n dcori'ii nisi and enstody of tlie children. Costs amounting to .£SB Bs. were given against Ifwersen, - tho co-respondent. ._.