IN DIVORCE

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 120, 14 February 1920, Page 8

IN DIVORCE

A VERDICT FOR DAMAGES

"VALUE,OF A WIFE" DECISION QUOTED

Charles Wa'ter Aldridee, for whom Sir. A. W. Blair appeared, sought a dissolution of his marriage with Agnes Ada Aldridse oii the grounds of misconduct with Harrv Williams. Petitioner claimed from the co-respondent JiTOO damages. Mr. I'. W. Jackson appeared for the respondent, and Mr. E. 11. Webb for : th# co-resnondent. The case was heard before His Honour Mr. Justice lloskiug and a iury of hve'.ve.

.Mr. Blair, outlining the petitioner's case, said that tile parties were married in Ohristchurch in 1012, and there wns one child of the marriage. Petitioner enlisted with the Australian forces, leavimr New Zealand in June, 1916. He returned from active service in October, 1918. He rejoined his wife, and they lived tosetlier for about a month or six weeks, when petitioner received some information which made him believe that durim.' his absence she had misconducted herself. lln consequence he left her, and instituted divorce proceedings.

Petitioner and "several others gave evidence. ■

The co-respondent said that he first dis'.overed the respondent was ii married woman when she herself told liim during illness in 1917. He denied misconductini: himself'with respondent at any time after he knew that, she was a married women.

In addressing the jurr, Mr. Webb submitted that there was no evidence of misconduct. If the jury found that there had been misconduct on the part of respondent and co-respondent, then the damases. if any, shou.d be nominal, on tho ground that respondent passed as a finale woman, and that the co-resnondent did not. know she was married. He anoted the cable message giving the important judgment of Sir H. M'Cardio regarding damages. Mr. Blair submittal that all that had lo be shown was reasonable evidence that misconduct had taken place. There was the evidence of letters and telegrams that the relations between the two had not ceased when the co-respondent learned that tho respondent was a married woman.

His Honour summed up at some length, nml submitted for the decision of the iurv lour issues; "(1) Did tho respondent commit: adultery with the co-respond-ent? i'!i) Did the co-re:?pondent commit ndulterv with the respondent? (3) If tho co-resDondfMit committed adultery with the respondent, did he believe at tho time that she was a single woman? and (4) If the answers to the foregoing are in the affirmative, what damages, if any, is tho ne'itioner cntit'.cd to'" The jury answered the first three issues in tho affirmative and fixed the at .£125. , , His Honour granted a decree nisi, to 1)6 made absolute in three months. Tho question of access of the respondent, to the child was reserved for consideration when the decree absolute is moved. Judgment on the question of' damages was reserved with leave to co-respondent to move that the verdict, for damages bo set aside. Co-respondent was ordered. lo pay the petitioner's costs on the lower scale, and petitioner was ordered to pay respondent's costs on the lower scale with right to recover the amount from tho co-respondent. $ ' ERASER V.' FEASER. The petition of Donald Fraser, telegraph linesman, for a dissolution of his marriage with Jessie Fraser on tho ground of misconduct with Ernest Froulc Tvree, which was partly heard on Thursday, was concluded -yesterday. His Honour said that the jury had to decide: H) "Whether the respondent had committed adultery with E'. F. Tyrce, and (2) whether Tyrec had committed adultery with the respondent. After' a retirement of about 50 minutes tho jury returned and answered the questions in tho affirmative. His Honour granted a dccree nisi to bo moved absolute in. ihreo months, with costs against the co-respondent on tha lowest scale. Mr. Jr. Jlvcrs appeared for the petitioner. Mr. J. M. Dale for the respondent and Mr. A. "W. Blair for iho corespondent. Mr. A. Christensen was foreman of the jury.