SEVERED TIES

Evening Post, Volume XCVI, Issue 41, 16 August 1918, Page 8

SEVERED TIES

UNHAPPY MARRIAGES

DISSOLVED

His' Honour the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) was on. the Bench at the Supreme Court to-day, and dealt with a number of undefended divorce petitions. i ALLEGED HABITUAL DRUNKENNESS. The first case taken was that of Cecilia Hamilton Hobbs v. Leonard Alexander Hobbs, the ground being alleged habitual drunkenness. Mr. H. F. O'Leary appeared for the petitioner. Tha case was originally set down as a defended case, but Mr. P.. W. Jackson intimated this morning that the defence would not be proceeded with. It was stated that the respondent was a farm labourer, the parties had been married in 1912, and soon afterwards the respondent commenced to drink heavily, and failed to. provide adequate maintenance for petitioner or her children. Having heard the evidence of petitioner, his Honour granted a decree nisi. Costs were not asked for. ' DESERTION PROVED. The next case was that of Margaret Aylward v. Michael Francis Aylward, a petition oh the grounds of desertion. Mr. P. W. Jackson appeared for the petitioner, who stated that she was married to respondent in 1902. Two children were bom of the marriage, and all went well until 1911, when her husband left her. Since then she had not seen him, nor had he contributed anything towards her maintenance, or that of the children. : A sister of the petitioner gave evidence of having asked respondent, some six years ago, for money to send to his ■family, but he flatly refused to support them. A decree nisi, with costs on the lowest scale, was granted. AFTER MANY YEARS. William Francis Ludlow, represented by Mr. H. F. O'Leary, asked for a dissolution of his marriage with Ruth Ludlow, on the ground of misconduct, Samuel Lord being joined as co-respondent. Petitioner stated that he was married in 1889, and lived with his wife until April of this year, when she went away. There were seven children of the marriage. After his wife went away he discovered that she was living at Caroline-street, Wellington, with the co-respondent. He had had previous trouble over his wife and the co-respondent, but had forgiven her. A son of- the parties gave evidence of having gone to Caroline-street to try I and persuade his mother to return home, but she refused to do so. His Honour granted a. decree nisi, with costs on the lowest scale against the corespondent. FORTUNE-TELLING- AND SPIRITUALISM. Herbert Barton alleged misconduct and desertion in his petition against his wife, Louisa Barton. William Stonor was joined as co-respondent. Petitioner said he was married in 1885, and there were four children of the marriage. Twelve years ago his wife left him, and took up "spiritualism and fortune-tel-ling," travelling about from place to place, accompanied by the co-respondent, with whom she had also lived in Wellington. A son-in-law of the parties stated that the respondent and co-respondent travelled together under the name of Mr. and Mrs. Barton, and were living together still. A decree nisi was granted, with costs on the lowest scale against the co-re-spondent. Mr. P. W. Jackson appeared for the petitioner. A SOLDIER'S PETITION. "Joseph Raitt.(Mr. Jackson), a returned soldier, said he left New Zealand in 1916, and returned in June of this year. While he was away his wife, Eliza Jane Raitt, drew his pay, but on his return he found her living at Tui-street with a man variously known as M'lntyre and Telford: She admitted that she had been living with the man for some time, and made similar admissions on subsequent occasions. A private detective gave corroborative evidence, stating that Telford Was also a returned soldier. A decree nisi was granted, with costs on the lowest scale against the co-respondent. WIFE AND LODGER. A .tailor's cutter named Horace Charles Fisk, represented by Mr. O'Leary, sought a divorce from Hilda Mary Fisk, on the ground of misconduct. Conrad' Beazley was joined as co-respondent. Petitioner gave evidence bhat the corespondent was a lodger in their home, but becoming suspicious of the latter he (witness) told him to leave the house. He did so, but petitioner saw his wife and the co-respondent repeatedly together at tho pictures and elsewhere. Subsequently co-respondent and respondent went to Auckland and lived together as man and wife. This they had admitted both verbally and by letter. When the wife went away she took ono of the children with her, and left tho other with the father. . A witness, William Henry Hargreaves, a neighbour of the parties, gave evidence that respondent had told him that she had been living with the co-respondent and was going back to Auckland with him, adding that «he would "go through hell and fire for Beazley." A decree nisi was granted, with costs against the co-respondent. A NURSE'S D'E&ERTION. Mr. C. W. Tringham appeared in support'of the petition lodged by Charles Edgar Burgoyne Jenkins against his wife, Eminsline Adams Jenkins, on the ground of desertion. Petitioner stated that he and! his wife were married in England in 1902, and had two children. They came to New Zealand in 1912, but early in 1913 his wife, who was a nurse, left him, stating that if he could not earn £6 per week he was "no good- to her." Since there ho had not lived, with his wife, and she had refused his offer to provide a home for her. Corroborative evidence was given, and his Honour iMueA & decree nisi. IN LOVE WITH THE BOARDER. William John White, an ex-Waihi miner, was represented by Mr. P. W. Jackson, in his allegation: of desertion and misconduct against his wife, Clara Agatha White. He said that they were married in 1901, and on Christmas Day of 1908 his wife left him to go to Auckland, a boarder named Borgmann having left the day previously. The pair were subsequently discovered to be living together at Grey-street, Auckland. "She appeared to be in love with, the boarder," said tho petitioner, "and she has never returned to me." This_ was proved by other -witnesses. and his Honour granted the customary decree. TURNED ADRIFT. Margaret Murphy (Mr. Jackson) said sho was married to Charles Darnel Murphy in 1911. She had had a child before marriage, and of this the respondent was aware. Some five years ago respondent had turned her and the child out of the ■house, as she could not agree to put tho child in a. homo. Since then she had liad no support from him, although ho .had agreed to pay her ISs per week. A brother of petitioner gave evidence that she had had to maintain herself for tho past few years. His Honour granted a decree nisi with costs against tho respondent.

(Proceeding.)

Eggs liavo dropped in.price. To-day's wholesale quotations by the New Zealand Farmers' Co'-operativu Association is Is lOd per dozen,