SUDDEN END OF A DIVORCE CASE.

Evening Post, Volume LXVI, Issue 45, 21 August 1903, Page 6

SUDDEN END OF A DIVORCE CASE.

The petition of Helen Everett, of Nelson, for a judicial separation from her husband, Frank Evelyn Everett, now of Wellington, ptoreman, came before Mr. Justice" Edwards and a common jury of four, of which Mr. John Thorburn was foreman, in the Divorce Court this morning. Dr. Findlay appeared for the petitioner, and on his application leave was given to make the petition one for dissolution of marriage, subject to the At-torney-General being notified of the change, which will be confirmed on him filing a notice accordingly. Mr. Jellicoe appeared for the respondent, whose filed defence was a general denial of the allegations in support of the petition. The parties were married in December, 1889, in New South Wales, and subsequently lived at Blenheim and Nelson, Tuere were three children. About April and May, 1901, Mrs. Everett received letters warning her of her husband's alleged misconduct with one Martha Heperi and another young woman. She also found in his pocket a letter from the former, which she copied and produced in Court. Petitioner also alleged cruelty and unkindness on the part of her husband. Mr. Jellicoe did not cross-examine Mrs. Everett. The next witness called by Dr. Findlay was Martha Heperi, a comely your.g woman, of Petone, who said she was staying at Richmond in 1901. His Honour said it was his duty to inform the witness what her position was in regard to the law. She was not liable to be asked nor was she bound to answer any question that tended to show that she had been guilty of adultery. Witness in reply to questions denied that she had committed adultery with the respondent. When she was in Nelson they went out cycling, together on different occasions, and had kissed frequently. The alleged copy of the letter she wrote on returning to Wellington was not as she wrote it, but was exaggerated. The reference to "Good old British for ever" in the letter may have referred to Bull-dog stout. They had some bottled stout one day while cycling to Richmond. Believed she addressed him as "Dear Frank.". The crosses in the letter probably meant kisses. She may have written that if he came over to Wellington she would give him a good old squeeze, but she couldn't remember saying it. Questioned -as to some details of different matters in the letter, witness said they were correct. A mention of her father's anger quieting referred to the fact that he had been angry because Mrs. Everett had written to him trying to make mischief about what witness had done in Nelson. Was out with respondent in the evening only once Respondent never wrote at all to witness after she returned to Wellington. The letter as copied by the petitioner and referred to above read as follows: — "23rd May, 1901.— My Dear Old Sweetheart, — Received yours yesterday, and sorry I missed the return mail. I had a real good hearty laugh at your funny remarks. What a good substantial letter you do. write. Are the busy letter-writers at work? I think it an awful shame. My father's temper is quiet now. I often think I do not deserve half they do for me. I am sorry to hear your father has broken his collarbone. Dear Frank, when I met father in town he did say something about a married gent, and he supposed I knew who it was. I did not give mother that kiss you sent her. Dear sweetheart, I always go on the quiet to the P.O. for your letters. What I meant was, write so as I can read it to mother and Evelyn. Do not say anything about us drinking Bull-dog together or our high jinks in Nelson. Dear Frank, think of us behind the linoleum, then take our thoughts back to Halifax-street. Oh ! be quiet. Do come over, there's a dear. What a big squeeze and kiss I will give you. Let me know at-least three or four days before, so as I can have a tale ready. I will plan something beautiful. Thank you for the fur I am to receive. I must behave myself, as mother is going to take me to the Rowing Club ball next Friday night. Dear Frank, will you send me over enough black satin to make a blouse, and some sequins and heliotrope silk to trim it with? I must look smart when you come over. What a big squeeze I will give you. Also enough like enclosed pattern (only in red) .to make a coat and skirt. You know, dear Frank, I am backward in^ asking for the above, and too forward at giving. (Here follow some family details.) Dear Frank, I have now come to the length of my tether ; will write more next time. With a big kiss and squeeze from yours, Martha." In the course of a postscript the writer says : "British for ever. I had two on my own last night." x x x x x x Dr. Findlay was continuing to go through the letter, when Mr. Jellicoe rose and said he thought he should not contest the matter any further. He did not think he should make it necessary for his learned friend to have to press this painful subject any more. His Honour, addressing the jury, said | Mr. Jellicoe was content that they should now find a verdict on the one issue to be submitted to them : ''Did the respondent commit adultery with Martha Heperi?" His Honour remarked that he thought Mr. Jellicoe had acted quite rightly and exercised his discretion wisely. Without leaving the Court the jury answered the question in the affirmative. The case was then adjourned for a week to enable the formal matter with the Attorney-General to be disposed of.

On Sunday next the Kent-terrace Presbyterian Church intends holding special services in connection with the Sundayschool, when the choir will be reinforced for the occasion by about seventy of the Sunday-school children. The final practise is to be held to-night. The Rev. W. Lamb, of Ohiro, will preach in the morning, and the Rev. J. K. Elliott in the evening, while Mr. George Tiller will give an address to the scholars in the afternoon*