THE DIVORCE COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 11661, 16 December 1902, Page 2

THE DIVORCE COURT.

In giving his decision yesterday in Bond v. Bond, a wife's petition for dissolution of marriage, Mr Justice Williams said: No doubt in cases where the petitioner charges the respondent with adulteiy, adultery must be conclusively proved. If there is direct evidence of the fact of adulteiy, and the Court believe that evidence, then the adultery is conclusively proved. I am compelled to come to the conclusion in tho present ease that tho evidence of the girl Wood is credible. The position of the respondent was this; he evidently did! not get on well with his wife; ho came to town, took a different name from that which he was formerly known by, and posed as either a single man or a widower. The girl Wood, who is now married, says that lie told her he was a widower, and Mr Sinclair savs ho told him he was a widower. That being the state of things, ho meets the gid Wood at the Salvation Army Barracks. She approaches him and makes overtures to him • —not necessarily improper overtures—but she is the one who evidently started the relationship. In such circumstances it is reasonable to suppose that; what tho girl Wood says did happen would happen. As I said, her evidence as to his stating he was a widower is virtually the. evidence given as to what he stated to Sinclair, aud his statement of what took place at the interviews he says ho had with Miss Wood is, to my mind, difficult to believe. Mr Macdonald lias commented on tho rather extra.ordinary nature of the statements made ns to what took place. Then Miss Wood takes proceedings against him in respect to the child. Those proceedings he settles bypaying £4O. It is true it does not follow that because a person is charged with the paternity of a child and compromises tho case that necessarily he admits that he was the father of the child; but where a person in respondent’s position in life pays so large a sum as £4O to settle a daim of that kind I think the inference is that he would not have settled it unless there was sometling substantial in it. Further than this, there is no suggestion or evidence of any combination between Miss Wood and the petitioner. They seem both to be strangers to each other, and Miss Wood says die knew nothing of Mrs Bond, for or against, until she got a subpoena. Thai statement there is nothing to contradict Miss Wood has no object in giving the evidence she gave. If die were in the present case trying to-make oat a charge for affiliation and seeking to recover money from the respondent hear evidence might be viewed in a d fferent light. But here she has absolutely no interest in saying what is not true, nor has die any interest in coming forward; rather the contrary, as she is now a mar, tied woman. Her interest would ba to keep her past hidden as much as possible. Her interest, therefore, is. that of an entirelv disdnterestod person. The evidence of the respondent, on the contrary, is that of a person who has tho deepest interest. I think, therefore, that the petitioner has made out her case, and is entitled to a decree nisi, to become absolute after three months. Costs to petitioner (£150); witnesses’ expenses and disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar. At Wellington yesterday a decree nisi was granted in the case of Catherine Krapp v. Edward Krapp, an application for dissolution of marriage on account of the husband’s drunkenness and failure to maintain jK-tilioucr. Lavenia -Marsh obtained a dis-

solution of her marriage with Gewge Marsh on tho grounds of desertion and adtdtery. Henry George Smith sought a divorce from Clarence Smith on. account of desertion. Respondent, had refuted to lire with petitioner in,the country, whore he had taken, lip a farm., A decree nisi whs granted. In the case of Ellen Hall v. Edwin Hall, judgment was postponed pending proof of certain-■: formalities; having been executed. A decree was granted in camera, dissolving the marriage of Sidney Leonard and Sarah Leonard (Daniel Robertson co-respondent). “Our Own - ’ at Wellington -wires; Robert Crofts, who is we!l- known in the athletic world from his performances as a champion long-distance runner, was the respondent yesterday in a. divorce petition filed by bis wife. The parties were married at Dunedin in 1882, and four veers latgr Crofts departed for the other siib and had never returned. A decree nisi, to be made absolute in three months, was pronounced against Crofts, who did not put in an appearance.