NOT FOR PUBLICATION.

Feilding Star, Volume XVIII, Issue 4592, 18 May 1922, Page 1

NOT FOR PUBLICATION.

EVIDENCE IN DIVORCE CASE. (By Electric Telegraph.-—Copyright.) (Aust. and N.Z. Cable Associaion.) Christchurjn, May 17. “The object of this section of the Act,” said Mr Justice Adams in the Supreme Court to-day i:i making an order restricting tho publication of details in a d’vorce *uit, “is clearly to prevent tho publicati m of information pandering'to tho salacious individuals forming, I should say, a vory small section of the _ community.” The case was that in which Mary Ann MacGibboo, of Christchurch petitioned ur a divorce from William Smith MacCibbon, of Christchurch, accountant, on the grounds of his adultery with an unknown woman in Hagley Park. His Honour said it was the duty of the Court alwavs to exercise care and discretion in the execution of tho power conferred on it by the section of tile Act, as quoted. “In the case before him, tho Court had been assured by counsel that the details were more than usually unpleasant. He thought an order should he made. I make the order,” he said, “restricting the publication of details of the case to tlio names of the parties, the allegations upon which the petition is laid, and the conclusion.”