SEVERED BONDS

Evening Star, Issue 19550, 7 May 1927, Page 9

SEVERED BONDS

DIVORCE DAY IN COURT His Honor Mr Justice Reed this morning dealt with a_ number of applications for dissolution of marriage on various grounds, CALLAGHAN v. CALLAGHAN. Hugh Callaghan v. Mary Callaghan, petition tor divorce on the ground or desertion. , , ~ Mr W. L. Moore appeared for the petitioner. . ~ , Petitioner stated in_ evidence that the parties were married at Wellington in 1909 They lived there for some time and later removed to Oamaru. After ten weeks in Oamaru his wife left him, as she did not want to live there. He had not seen her since. He was caring for the children. She left a letter when she went away saying she had taken him at his word. Mr Moore: “ What was that?” Petitioner: “She said she was going to Wellington! and bo told her to do as she pleased.’’ Ho added that the wife took £l6O with her. Evidence was given hy an Oamaru farmer. . . . His Honor granted a decree nisi, with leave to move it absolute at the expiry of three calendar months.

HERBERT v. HERBERT,

Eliza Herbert v. Sidney May Herbert, application for divorce on the ground of mutual separation for upwards of three years. Mr A. C. Hanlon appeared for the petitioner. Eliza Herbert stated that in 1901 she married Sidney David Herbert. There were three children. She had lived unhappily with her husband, and in 1923 they agreed to separate. Sjm had not lived with him since. She had worked to support herself .nd the children, her husband having contributed nothing for their suppor-v t Evidence was given by a kngotcr. and His Honor granted a decree nisi, with leave to move it absolute no the expiry of three months, petitioner to have custody of the children. Hosts on the lowest' scale wore granted against respondent. SCOTT v. SCOTT.

Elizabeth Louise Scott (Mr A. C. Hanlon) v. Frederick Ernest Scott, a petition for dissolution of marriage on the ground of mutual separation. Petitioner said she was married on April 17, 1915, to respondent. There was one child of the marriage. The parties separated under a deod < in 1924, and had not lived together since. Evidence having been given by Mary Hamlin Keranitz, a decree nisi was granted, to bo moved absolute in three months. Petitioner to have interim custody of tho child. Costs on lowest scale. PEDERSEN v. PEDERSEN.

Albert Pedersen (Mr W. L, Moore) v. Olivo Edith Pederson, petition for dissolution of marriage on the ground of desertion.

Petitioner said ho married respondent in 1921, There was was no child of the actual marriage. There had been some trouble over relatives, and respondent had left him in March, 1922. He had not seen her since.

Evidence having been given by Henry Cranefield, a decree nisi was granted, to be made absolute in three months, SPEEDING v. -SPEEDING.

Gordon Alexander Shedding v.Vera Sylvia Spedding, pettiion for divorce on the ground of desertion. Mr E. J. Anderson appeared for the petitioner. Petitioner stated in evidence that he lived with his wife for four and a-half years Then there was troubleover another man in regard to his wife going to places of amusement. After having a holiday in Timaru she came back, but left again soon after. She insisted on going away, despite his pleadings to remain. She wrote a letter saying they had married too young, and that sho did not love him as a wife should. He wont to the station the morning she left in 1923, but she would mpt listen to his pleadings to return to him. _ Evidence was given that petitioner had been living with his mother since his wife left.

His Honor granted a decree nisi, with leave to make it absolute at the expiry of three months.

PARKER v. PARKER,

Flora Parker v. James Parker, petition for divorce on the ground of misconduct. Mr H. E. Barrowclough appeared for tho petitioner. Petitioner stated that she was married in 1920. They lived at Kingston and later at Waitati. There were two children. She heard of her husband’s misconduct and left him in 1924. She had not seen him since. He had never denied the misconduct, ,

Mr Locke, juvenile probation officer, said he had seen Parker at O.laka in connection with the living conditions of two children who were with Parker and a woman named Rosa Clark. Parker admitted the paternity of the children.

His Honor granted a decre nisi, with leave to move it absolute at the expiry of three months. Petitioner y as granted interim custody of the children, and costs on tho lowest scale were allowed against respondent. PATERSON v. PATERSON. Elspctb Julia Paterson v. Alexander M. Paterson, petition for divorce on tho ground of sepaartion for upwards of three years. Mr C. J. L. White appeared for tho petitioner. Petitioner staled in evidence that she lived with her husband for three years and had one child. In -1923 they were not getting on well together, and agreed to separate. She had come to Dunedin from Beaumont, and had not lived with him since.

Evidence was given by a sister of petitioner, and His Honor granted a decree nisi, with leave to move it absolute at the expiry of three months.

MASON v. MASON,

Dora Gertrude Mason v. John Philip Mason, petition for divorce on the ground of mutual separation for three years. Mr R. A. Aspinall appeared for tho petitioner, and Mr C. J. L. White for the respondent. In evidence petitioner stated that she was married in 1908. It was an unhappy marriage right from the start. There were three children. In May, 1923, they agreed to separate, and tho separation took place the next month. She had not lived with her husband since.

Mr White said he appeared only in connection . with the custody of the children, who were living with the father.

Mr Aspinall said he did not propose to make any application for custody in the meantime. The matter could b© dealt with when the application for a decree absolute came before the cgurt. His Honor granted a decree nisi, with leave to move it absolute at the expiry of three months. Costs were allowed against respondent on the lowest scale.