DESERTION ALLEGED

Evening Post, Volume XCIII, Issue 47, 23 February 1917, Page 8

DESERTION ALLEGED

PHOTOGRAPHER SEEKS DIVORCE

WIFE DOES NOT LIKE AVELLINGTON.

A somewhat unusual petition in divorce came before his Honour Mr. Justice Chapman afc the, Supreme Court to-day. Horace Rupert Maybury, photographer, sought for a dissolution of his marriage with Annette Maud Maybury on the ground of desertion. An answer to the petition was filed alleging constructive desertion and cruelty on the part of the .petitioner, and counter-peti-tioning for divorce.

Mr. W. F. Ward appeared for the petitioner and Mr. M. Myers for the respondent.

Petitioner stated that he was married to the respondent in Christchurch in August of 1907, and one child was born in 1908. Some little time after the marriage he insisted on taking his wife out one night for a walk, in accordance with a doctor's advice. When they got out his wife blamed him bitterly for taking her out when she did not want to go; and after a few words she said she wished she had never been married. She then went to her mother's house, and later on ho called there to see her, but she was not there. On returning to his own hotse the door was open, and he was greeted by her mother I and brothers with broomsticks, potsticks, and hammers. He then left. Later on "i he wrote to his wife giving her a certain time in which to come back, but he got no reply. Then ho sold his furniture and left for Sydney, returning in about three weeks. In the early part of 1908 he again went to Christchurch at the request of his mother-in-law, "to make it up with Nettie." He stayed at his mother-in-law's house for four days, and was on the most cordial terms with his wife. During their temporary separation he had sent his wife money regularly. Letters from the wife to the petitioner couched in affectionate terms were read by counsel. In one of, the letters she said she would not leave Christchurch. Prior to this he had been working in Wellington. On a subsequent visit to Christchurch from Wellington his wife said to him that she would not go to Wellington to live, but the. day lie came to live in Christchurch she would come to him. Later on that day her brothei". said to him "Nettie will not go to AVellington, so you can get to out of it." As he was going away, his wife threw a parcel he had got for the child after him, stating that the child .would require nothing more from him. He returned to Wellington, and then went to England for a trip, lodging a sum of money for his wife's maintenance with a firm of Wellington solicitors. This .money was never touched. Later on, letters he wrote to his wife were not answered, and he received a summons for the maintenance of his child. An order, by consent, was issued for 10s* per week, and he had kept up the payments regularly. He. had sent no money to his wife since she refused to take it from the solicitors. His wife had private means of 'her own. , . NOT CRUEL OB JEALOUS. To Mr. Myers : It was only quit© recently that his wife had means left to her. He was now living in a house at Kelburn,, for.which he paid the rent. The only row he ever had with his wife was on the occasion of the evening in Christehurch. lie never told his wife he would cut her throat and would.be glad to get rid-of her,' and he had neverthrown a knife at her. He was not of a jealous disposition,- and did not object to his wife speaking to anyone. He had n:ever said to, his wife, " fou can't leave me, your people, would never take you back." . . ;

Mr. Myers : Was that not your usual taunt?— No. - i ;

Her people were rather angry at the marriage, were they, not?—Oh yes, and so were mine. ■'' . .

When you got back to the house that time : and were, greeted with the hail of pots and pains, did you run away?— I tried to reason, with them, and on;e of the brothel's struck me on the back with a hammer ?

Was it-not a horsewhip?— No. Did you send a clergyman along to your wife to. ask her to forgive you?— No, he said he would go.

AVas thei J,e anything to forgive?—Oh, not much.

About the payments for child; when did you make the last payment?— Yesterday. • • .

How much were you in arrears ? — Three months behind.

When you. wanted to make your homo did you say. to your wife you would take her far away from her own people? —I deny that. "

Did she not say she had the protection of her own people in Christchurcb ?— Oh, no.

Annette Maud Maybury said thai the months of her marriage from August to November were the most unhappy slie had ever spent. Her husband was not in constant work, and was of a very jealous and,"brooding" disposition. They were married in August and some three weeks later he threw a knife at her. Many times she threatened to leave him owing to his cruelty, saying that she would rather die than lead- the life she was leading. He used to say, "Your own people would not have you ■ anyhow; what • can .you do?" Petitioner had a bullying 1, domineering, cruel nature, and it had a very bad effect on her nerves. Continuing, witness gave her version of the happenings on" the night when the petitioner forced her to go for a walk against her will. She said his taunts would drive her, to suicide, and he said, "Go on, then; there's a tram, get under it;'it's the best thing you can do."

(Proceeding.)