BROKEN BONDS

Evening Star, Issue 20943, 6 November 1931, Page 10

BROKEN BONDS

DIVORCE DAY IN COURT UNDEFENDED PETITIONS HEARD Tt« Supreme Court was fully engaged this morning. hearing undefended petitions for dissolution of marriages. Mr •Justice Kennedy presided. SEPARATION AGREEMENT. Alethea Mary Robertson sought a dissolution of her marriage with Alfred Ernest Robertson on tho ground of a separation agreement. Petitioner gave evidence that she was married to the respondent in September. 1915, and there were three children or the marriage. After the marriage the parties resided in Dunedin and •Warrington, where they lived on a farm and where her husband’s conduct towards her was not very good; and finally a deed of separation was entered into. Since then she had lived apart from her husband. After corroborative _ evidence had been given, a decree nisi was granted, [to be moved absolute after the expiration of three months, petitioner to have the interim custody of children, respondent to pay costs on the lower scale, RESPONDENT IN GAOL. A separation agreement was the ground of a petition by Sarah Ann Batterbee against Walter Batterhee. Petitioner said she wa« married to respondent in England in May, 1910. ITor twelve months after the marriage she lived at Horncastle, while her husband went to Canada. When he returned they lived together at Manchester, and respondent then joined the 'Army, serving throughout the war. At the end of the war they lived at Manchester, and then came to New Zealand, settling some time later at Waikouaiti. There were tno children. In ■1926 she applied for a separation, and ■the order had been in full force over «inoo. ~ Petitioner’s brother gave evidence ■that in 1924 Batterbee had been convicted on various charges, and sentenced to eleven years’ imprisonment, .which he was still serving. A decree nisi, to he made absolute after three months, was granted. PETITION DISMISSED. When the case of Gilbert Wilson Gillies v. Honoria Christina Gillies was called, counsel for the respondent stated that the case had been hanging over for some time, and petitioner’s solicitor had been written to by registered letter asking if he intended going on with the petition. The petitioner had not appeared, and counsel asked that tho petition be dismissed. His Honour said the petition would be. dismissed, petitioner to pay the respondent’s costs on the lower scale, witnesses’ expenses, and disbursements to be fixed by the registrar. FURTHER EVIDENCE REQUIRED. A dissolution of her marriage with Edward James Gesn on the ground of a separation agreement was sought by Margaret Geen. Petitioner in evidence said that she and her husband were married in March, 1905, at Oamaru. In October, 1924, petitioner secured a separation order on the grounds of failure to maintain her, and she had not lived with him since. Corroborative evidence was given, after which tho case was adjourned to enable counsel to produce the . separation order. DESERTION THE GROUNDS. Agnes Millar asked that her marriage with Robert Taylor Millar be dissolved on the ground of desertion. Evidence was given that the parties were married in February, 1913, in Dunedin. They lived at various places until 1924, when they returned to Dunedin. She Had to work to support her husband and self. In August, 1926, her husband walked out and bad since contributed nothing to her maintenance. Corroborative evidence was given by petitioner’s sister-in-law, and a decree nisi was made, to be moved absolute after three months. ADULTERY. James Miller Marshall applied for a dissolution of his marriage with Ada Ann Ridley Marshall on the ground of adultery. Petitioner stated that he and the respondent were married in May, 1923, at Timaru. After the marriage the parties lived at Maheno, and there were three children of tho marriage. Witness had known the co-respondent (William MTTadden) for four years. Co-respondent went to live at petitioners home in October, 1929, and boarded there till June, 1931, In November of last, year witness noticed that things were not as they should be, and witness told bis wife that ho intended' to tell M’Fadden to go away. His wife said that if he did that she would go too. Respondent slept in a ■room by herself, and witness kept a watch on her movements; and in Juno he saw his wife and M‘Faddon in bed together. A few nights’ later, with a witness, he again saw them in bed together. Witness gave AlTadden ten minutes to get out, and he went. 'Although they lived in the same house witness had nothing to do with his wife and she left the house in September. Corroborative evidence was given, and a decree nisi, to be moved absolute after the expiration of three months, was granted, co-respondent to pay petitioner’s costs on .the lower scale, witnesses’ expenses, and disbursements to be fixed by the registrar. FAILED TO RETURN. Non compliance with an order for the restitution of conjugal rights was the grounds for the divorce petition bv Percy Wilfrid Lunam against Evelyn Isobel_ Lunam. - Petitioner said he was married at Knox Church in 1928. There wore no children. In May of this year* respondent left him and. she had failed to comply with the restitution decree made in July, although lie had kept the home open to her. A decree nisi, to be made absolute alter the expiration of three months, wa* granted. BRIEF MARRIED LIFE, Philip Sydney Rodger sought a dissolution of marriage with Dorothv Charlotte Rodger on the ground of desertion . Petitioner said ho was married to the respondent in April, 1928, and after the marriage lie lived with his wife at her people’s home at Invercargill for a fortnight or three weeks. She then left the home with her mother against the petitioner’s wishes. Respondent went to Timaru, and he had not seen her since. Witness beard she had had a child, but he had never seen it. After corroborative evidence had been given, a decree nisi, to be moved absolute after the expiration of three months, was made. UNHAPPY DIFFERENCES. Desertion was the ground on which Evelyn Cadogan sought a dissolution of her marriage with Clement John Perciyal Cadogan. Petitioner said that she and the rsggpodwKf married *£ Whitaolifia,

Canterbury, in April, 1904, and the parties lived together at various places m Canterbury and the North Island. There were two children of the marriage. About January, 1915, when living at Carterton, following _ unhappy differences, respondent left witness for an unknown locality. Witness had since earned her own living and had not lived with the respondent. Corroborative evidence was given by a sister of the petitioner, and a decree nisi, to be made absolute after the expiration of three months, was granted, respondent to pay costs on the lower scale. THREE TIMES FORGIVEN. Fanny Lucy* O’Couneli sought a dissolution of her marriage with Francis John Robert O’Connell on the ground of adultery. Petitioner said she was married to the respondent in 1925 at Caversham. They had since resided at Moruington, and there were four children of the marriage. In October, 1929, while living in Kenmure road, her husband went to his farm in Barr street with a Mrs Noni Ryan and her three children. Ho remained away for fourteen months, when he returned home. He stayed five days, and during that time he put witness’s weekly allowance through tho front door. Respondent had asked her to take him back, and she agreed to do so for tho sake of the children. When ho left he went to live in Caversham, but returned again thirteen days later, when ho asked for, and. was granted, another chance. In January of this year he stayed away two nights, and witness packed his suit case, put it at tho door, and refused to let him in. A. fortnight later ho returned and was given a third chance, and he stayed till April, when witness saw him coming from a bouse in Mornington. Witness hurried homo, packed Ins suit case, and gave it to him at tho door. She later received a letter signed “ Nom Ryan.” Respondent returned in Jtfne, when ho was refused another chance and refused to leave. Witness called the police, who declined to interfere, and respondent slept in the washhouse. He stayed till September in the washhouse, witness giving him his meals, but he did not enter the house. Ho was arrested for debt on September 8, and while ho was away witness left the house and rented it. About July witness employed an inquiry agent to watch her husband. One night she saw that her husband had had a shave and had put on a dean shirt. She put out her lights, and. later the inquiry agent called and she went with him to a house in Meadow street, where Airs Ryan-' lived, and they watched it till 4 o’clock in the morning, when her husband came, out. Witness had at- ' ways had the' custody of the children.. The inquiry agent said that prior to July 24 he had been watching respondent for about four weeks, and on that ■ night witness saw O’Connell leave, his house and rim across the road. Witness followed, and then drove to opposite Airs Ryan’s house, and a few minutes later O’Connell arrived and was admitted. Witness returned for Airs O’Connell and took her back to the house. Corroborative evidence was given by tho mother and sister of the petitioner. At this stage tho case was adjourned to enable further evidence to be called. PRODUCTION OF DEEP2. Doris Lena M'Diarmid petitioned for divorce against Ronald Knox Al'Diarrnid, the grounds being a separation agreement effective since 1926. Petitioner said the marriage took place at Knox Church iu 1919, and there were two children of tho marriage. As a result of unhappy relations they agreed to separate, and a deed was drawn up. Witness had the custody of tho children. His Honour said a deed signed by the respondent only had been produced. Though it was said that there was in existence a document in similar terms signed by the petitioner, that document had nob been produced. The petitioner should either have produced the document or led evidence showing its destruction or the impossibility of producing it. Tho petition would be adjourned so that the document could be produced or evidence tendered. Later the document was produced, and a decree nisi, to be made absolute 'after three months, was granted. The petitioner is to have interim custody of the children.. CRUELTY ALLEGED. Walter Boreham was the respondent iu tho case in which_ Alargaret Stanley Boreham petitioned for a dissolution of her marriage on the ground of a separation agreement. Petitioner said that her marriage to the respondent took ’'place in April, 1925, and she lived with her husband in 1926. There was one child of the marriage living. Her husband was cruel to her, and a separation agreement was entered into. Since then she.had lived apart from her husband, and she had had the custody of the child. _ , Corroborative evidence was given, and a decree nisi, to be moved absolute after the expiration of three months, was granted, petitioner to have interim custody of the child of the marriage. CITY LIFE DISLIKED. Desertion was the ground on which Harold Davies relied in a petition for a dissolution of his marriage with Ida May Davies. Petitioner said that he married tho respondent in August, 1919,, after which they lived at Dunedin and Waikouaiti, and witness then secured a position in Balclutha,. but respondent refused to leave Waikouaiti. She also declined to live in Dunedin, where he was working. Social workers had endeavoured to get his wife to return to him, but she refused. Since March, 1928, she had remained away from him. After corroborative evidence had been given, a decree nisi, to bo moved absolute aftc; three months, was granted. DECREE ABSOLUTE. A decree absolute was made in. the petition of Robert Simpson v. Sarah Cowper Low Simpson. Hearing of further divorce petitions was adjourned to this afternoon.