TIES BROKEN

Evening Post, Volume XCV, Issue 49, 26 February 1918, Page 7

TIES BROKEN

SITTING OF DIVORCE COURT

THE UNDEFENDED LIST.

At a sitting of the Supreme Court ill Divorce to-day a number of undefended cases were heard. However, many ca-ses set down for hearing at the present sessions ijere, for various reasons, allowed to stand over for three months His Honour Mr. Justice Herdman was on the Bench. . SOON DESERTED. Elizabeth M'Coll Leitch applied for a dissolution of her marriage with Thomas George Leitch on the ground of desertion. The parties were married in tho Registry Office, Wellington, on 21st March, 1912. They lived together in the city for five days only. Respondent left for Sydney then, and later for San Francisco. The understanding waß that ho should send for petitioner, which he fail- • ed to do. There was one child, which respondent supported, for tho first threeyears, but had not done so since. According to petitioner, who was represented by Mr. H. F. O'Leary, respondent had stated that he did not intend, to return. Evidence was given that respondent was a qualified barrister, and that just prior to his marriage he was employed byMessrs. Bell, Gully, Bell, and Myers. A decree- nisi was granted, to be mads absolute in three months, YELVERTON 1 v. YE!LVERTON. Adultery wa6 the ground put forward by Irene Annie Yelverton for a_ dissolution of her marriage with I Barry" Surrey Harris Yelverton. Petitioner, for whom Mr. O'Leary appeared, stated that her husband was engaged in theatrical concerns. The parties wero married on 31st March, 1896, and had lived together in various parts of Australia. They had not lived together for two years except for two or three days in July last. In consequence of what she had been told, petitioner instituted divorce proceedings. John Roydon Brown, hotelkeeper, of Kimbolton, stated, that respondent stayed at his hotel in September last with another woman who was not his wife. A decree niei was granted on the usual terms. RODDA v. RODDA. Mr. P. W. Jackson appeared for Elizabeth Groundwater Rodda., who applied for a divorce from Stephen James Rodda, on the ground of adultery. The parties -were married on 11th January, 1912, and lived together in Cbrirstchurch and Wellington. Respondent left New. Zeaiand with the 3rd Reinforcements in February, 1915, and was returned in September of the same year. A decree nisi was granted, petitioner to have interim custody of the one child to the marriage. Mr. Jackson did not ask for costs. LUXON' v. LUXON. Adultery was also the ground set forth in the petition of Lillian Luxon for a divorce from Charles Thomas Luxon. The parties were married at Wellington on 4th July. 1916, and resided at Tas-man-street, Wellington, and at Pahiatua. They did not live together for more.than four months; . Petitioner said: "I left him because of his awful cruelty and terrible manners, and went away nursing." Subsequently enquiries were made by the police, and respondent was charged with contracting a. bigamous marriage with a woman named Barker. For that crime he was sentenced to six months' imprisonment. The usual decree was ■ granted, with co6ts on the lowest scale against respondent. BOWMAN v. BOWMAN. Ruth Anna Bowman, for whom Mr. A. J. Luke appeared, applied for a dissolution of her marriage with Charles Henry Bowman, the allegation being one of adultery. The parties were married' on 3rd December, 1888, and lived together in Christchurch, Waikare, Westport, and Reefton. Petitioner left her husband in 1905 because of his persistent ci'nelty. On one occasion he threatened her with a hammer Later she discovered that he was living with another^ woman, who had a notorious reputation in West' port. After corroborative evidence had been given a decree nisi was granted to be made absolute in three months..