SEVERING THE TIE

Evening Post, Volume CI, Issue 42, 18 February 1921, Page 8

SEVERING THE TIE

PETITIONS IN DIVORCE

LONG LIST OF CASES

His Honour the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) heard a. large number of undefended divorce petitions in the Supreme Court to-day. TAYOR v. TAYLOR. Elizabeth Taylor sought a dissolution of marriage with George Taylor on the ground" of desertiou and cruelty. Mr. C. W. Tanner appeared for petitioner, who, in evidence, stated that she married Taylor in England in 1911. Her husband had always behaved badly to, her, And drank heavily. He had failed to maintain her adequately. Further evidence was given by a daughter of the petitioner as to cruelty and drunkenness. , His Honour granted a decree nisi on the usual terms. .', ■ IMRIE v. IMRIE. William Owen Imrie petitioned for a divorce from Ethel Imrie on the ground .of desertion. Mr. T. M. Wilford appeared for the petitioner, who stated that his wife had left him in 1915, and had never since come back. She was supposed at present to be in Perth, West Australia... " . ! His Honour, after hearing evidence, granted a decree nisi. ASHTON v. ASHTON. Adultery was the ground of the petition of Herbert Ashton for dissolution of. his marriage with Jessie Elizabeth Ashton. Mr, D. S. Smith smieaved for the petitioner, who said that while he was away with the N.Z.E.TT. his wife had written admitting misconduct with another man. He had not seen his wife since he had returned to New Zealand, and in spite.of all efforts he had been unable to find her. She had sold his farm in Canterbury while he yva-s away. The sister of the respondent'sa-id that Mrs. Ashton in 1919 was employed in the Marble Bar, where the husband-of another sister, named Lange, was employed. Mrs. Lang© was in a private hospital at the time, and witness found Mrs. Ashton, and her brother-in-law, Lange, together in a bedroom in • the i afternoon. . '

His Honour granted a decree nisi, with costs against the co-respondent, and custody of the child. '

LANGE v. LANGE.

The same evidence of the same witness was taken in the case of Lange against Lange, resultant from-the former proceedings. The. names of the parties were Agnes Christine Letitia Lange '(Mr. Smith) and I*rahcis Gerard Lange. After hearing the evidence of the petitioner, his Honour granted a decree nisi, with costs against the respondent and custody of the one child.

BURDEN v. BURDEN. , Elizabeth Atherton Burden petitioned for divorce from her husband, Henry James Burden, on the ground of desertion. . Mr. A. W. Blair appeared for the. petitioner, who gave evidence of failure to maintain and desertion on the part of her husband. His Honour granted a decree nisi on the usual terms.

CUFF v. CUFF.

The ground of the petition of Annie Cuff for the dissolution of her marriage with Archibald Arthur Cuffwwats t desertiofi. The evidence of the petitioner, for whom Mr. E, P. Hay appeared, was to the effect that after the marriage, which took pla«e in, 1896, their relations were unhappy, and they parted in 1915, since when she had not seen her husband. He had not maintained her since. There were six children of the marriage. Further evidence was given by a daughter.

His Honour granted a decree nisi, to be made absolute in three months, with the custody of the three youngest children, and costs against the respondent.

BOCK v. BOCK.

Eileen Frances Annie Bock, for whom Mr. P. W." Jackson appeared, sought for dissolution of .her marriage with Paul Bock, on the ground of desertion. The parties were married in November, 1910, and parted in 1915. She had maintained herself since 1915, and was a nurse now in the Masterton Public Hospital* After hearing evidence, his Honour granted a decree nisi, to be made absolute in three months, with-costs on the lowest scale.

DAVIES v. DAVIES.

The petition of Eileen Davies for dissolution of marriage with Arthur Davies was on the ground of her husband's misconduct with another woman. ■ ' •

Mr. A. B. Sievwright appeared ' for petitioner, who stated that her marriage had been happy until 1916, when her husband began to- go with anottfer woman. She left him in January, 1917, and last year in September one night she saw her husband and Mrs. . Harefielld in a. compromising position. Further evidence was given by Edith Thomas, who with petitioner watched respondent and the other woman. ■■ |

His Honour granted a decree nisi on the usual term*. '■ '■ '■ ' ' .

TREACY v. TREACY.

Ella Treacy petitioned ■ for divorce from Sidney Joseph.- Treacy on the ground of. desertion. . Mr. H. F. O'Leary appeared for the petitioner. The parties'were-married-in 1913, and the husband left the wife in" 1914. Mrs. Treacy had kept herself ever since except for one month, when he was working at the Girls' College, and another period when.he was in camp—ahout 30s altogether.

His.Honour granted a decree nisi, to be made absolute in three months.

ROBERTS v. ROBERTS.

Helen Bertha Roberts sued for a, dissolution of hex- marriage with Joseph Roberts on the ground of cruelty and drunkenness: My. W. J\- Ward appeared for petitioner, who gave evidence of the failure to support, cruelty, and recurrent drunkenness alleged. Her husband had been convicted of forgoTy in 1919, and sent to Rotoroa.

His Honour granted a decree nisi, with custody jof tho children and costs against the respondent.. ,

SANDERSON v. SANDERSON,

Emily Louisa Sanderson, for whom Mr. T. M. Wilford appeared, sought divorce from Ernest B. Sanderson on the ground of desertion. According to the evidence of petitioner, they were married in 1901, and in 1911- respondent left her and had since never supported her.

His Honour, after hearing further Evidence, granted a decree-nisi.

BURMAN v. BUE.MAN

Olg-a,- Matilda Burman petitioned for divorce from William' James Burman on the ground'of adultery. . Mr. E. P Hay appeared for petitioner, who said they had only lived together 40 days after the marriage in 1919. She discovered her husband had been living with another woman for years, and he continued doing so after the marriage.' Further evidence was given by Mark Brooks as to the admission by' the respondent that he had been Jiving at Gisborne with, a woman, who passed as Mrs. Burman. . His Honour granted a decree nisi, with costs on the lowest scalej A CROSS-PETITION. On a cross-petition, Ada Corneal sought dissolution of marriage with WilL liam Henry Corneal, whose original peti-

tion for divorce was withdrawn, according to statement of counsel for respondent, Mr. T. Neave. Petitioner, for whom Mr. P. W. Jackson appeared, stated that the marriage had taken place in Wellington in 1898, and in 1908 Corneal went to England, and had never since supported her, though he had returned to New Zealand. There was one child, married now. The case' was undefended, and his Honour granted a decree nisi on the usual terms. TAYLOR, v. TAYLOR. f , Ada Florence Taylor sought for divorce from Edward Henry Taylor on the ground of adultery. Mr.- H. F. O'Leary j appeared, for the petitioner. The parties, according to the evidence, were married in Tasmania in 1904, and came to New Zealand shortly afterwards. Her husband had left her in 1918. Evidence was given by a brother of the respondent, who wrote admitting misconduct. His Honour granted a decree nisi oil the usual terms. ROWLEY v! ROWLEY. Adultery was alleged as the ground of the petition of George Daniel Rowley for divorce from Emma Evelyn Rowley. Mr.-E. P. Bunny'appeared for petitioner, who stated. his wife had left him, and was Jiving with one Loe at Karon". Evidence was given by Denis Mulhane as to . the respondent and' . co-respondent living together. A decree nisi was granted, petitioner to have custody of the children, and the respondent to have access to .them at reasonable times. JONES v. JONES. In the case of Thomas Jones v. Flossie Ethel Jones, the parties were married at Grendon, Warwickshire, in 1908, and came to New Zealand in 1912. Adultery waa alleged with one Radford. Mr. T, Young appeared for petitioner. After hearing evidence, his Honour granted a decree nisi on the usual terms. WALES v. WALES. This afternoon his Honour continued the •hearing of petitions. The case of Ethel Herbert Wales v. Cecil Brock Wales, on the ground of radultery, was adjourned for the production of an affidavit. Mr. R. Kennedy appeared for the petitioner. SBACKLEFORD v. SHACKLEFORD. A decree nisi was granted in the case of, Thomas Leslie Shacklcford (Mr. P. W. Jackson) and Irene Effie Shacklefor<i (Mr. H. .F. O'Leary). The ca.se was originally set -down on the defended list,, but the defence was withdrawn, and the respondent, alleging adultery,., proceeded on a counter-petition, which, after hear-. ing the evidence, his Honour duly granted. The parties were married in 1911, and there were four children. For about fifteen months she had riot lived with her husband, who was now in Auckland with another woman. Evidence to that effect was given by a private inquiry agent;

(Proceeding.)