A SINGULAR DIVORCE CASE.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXII, Issue 7941, 4 January 1888, Page 3

A SINGULAR DIVORCE CASE.

In the Probate and Divorce Division recently, Mr Justice Butt had before him the undefended suit of Ekins v. Ekins, which was the petition of the wife for a dissolution of marriage on the ground of her husband's cruelty and adultery. Mr Stanger appeared for the petitioner. Mrs Louisa Ekina, the petitioner, stated that she was married to J.he respondent on the 13th of May at Bfngham, near Nottingham. After the marriage they both continued to live at the homes of their respective parents at

Nottingham, they having' previously arranged to live apart for. . three'fcr six months, until the respondent could' provide a, home for her. Witness frequently asked her husband if he cnuld provide a home for her, but he never had. She was forced by the respondent into the-mar-riage. He was constantly asking. hef to marry him, saying that if she did\not : he would shoot her. It was under a. threat of that kind that she married" him at Bingbam. Mr Justice Butt : Dia you marry him to prevent being shot,. or as the lesser evil of the two? Petitioner: Ob, dear no. He threatenedto shoot me if I did not marry him, and we got married. Mr Justice Butt : If this story is true, it is a declaration of nullity of marriage, not of divorce. Petitioner, in reply to learned counsel, stated that 1 the threats were used just before they went to Bingbam Church to get married. After t marriage respondent ill-used her frequently when he met her. Mr Justice Butt : You say he ill-used you when he met you? Petitioner: Yes, because I frequently asked him when he was going to provide a home for rae. He Used to ban? me againßt the wall, and has. kicked me in the street many a time. Mr Stranger? Did your parents know you were married? Petitioner: No/, no one knew. Mr Justice Butt: Why did you not tell them? Petitioner; Because I was afraid to. Mr Justice Butt : 'Afraid of them or him ? Petitioner : Of him. Mr Justice Butt: I never .heard such a story in my life. Petitioner, continuing her evidence, said she was in the lace trade. On one occasion, in June of the present year, she was about to go to business, when she saw. the respondent, who lived only three diiors off, walking about outside. She waited an hour for him to go away, but, as he did not, she slipped out and went in the opposite direction. He, however, smy her, caught her up, and walked down the' town with her. In the course of the conversation between them, he: told fier that if she did not live with him he would make away both with himself and her. Witness had then heard of; his ifitimacV

with a Miss Moore, and she replied that she could never think of living with him after the way in which he had beeti carrying on with Miss Moore. Thereupon the respondent banged her against the warehouse door, and hurt her anh, which was bad for a week afterwards. 'She " at once got away from hini, and went to business. Mr Justico Biitt,: I

can't accept this Btory n& it if, told. It is quite impossible. Elirabelh- Ann Moore, living nfc Nottingham, was then examined, and stated that she knew the respondent, Thomas Eakins, with wbom she arranged en the 25th July last to take lessons in music from him. Ho had previously committed adultery with her on the Ist of March. Before "that he had at the beginning of the year, promised to marry her. She did not know he tow a roamed man. She was now enceinte 'by the respondent. Mrs HawkSley, the sister of tho petitioner, gave evidence as to seeing a bruiso and linger mark ou her sister's arm on the 25th of June last. She had previously seen bruises on her arms, but petitioner would never tell her how she came by them. Albert Hawksley, a solicitor's clerk at Nottingham, and husband of the previous witness, gave corroborative ovidenco as to tho bruises on the arm. He added that neither

he nor any other member, of the family at that time knew that the petitioner was married. John Harry Noble, a clerk in the employ of the solicitors to the petitioner, gave evidence to the effect that the respondent had admitted to hint his intimacy with Miss Moore. Kesporident likewise told him that on the Oceanian whan lie bruised his wife's arm he had asked her to come and live with him, and she had refused. He then caught hold of her, but she would not come Respondent, iv addition, said petitioner married him under threat of her life, and that he might have threatened to shoot her if slio did not come and livo with him. Mr Justice Butt said he was not quite clear about the allegation of non-consummation of marriage. He certainly did think the charge of adultery had beenproved. He had no doubt about that, but he did not think the charge of cruelty had been established, for, according to the evidence, the husband was only endeavoring to force his wife to come and live with him, and in default of that she was forced against the wall, and her arm braised. Mr Stanger aaked his Lordship if he wonld allow the case to stand over, so that the petition might be amended ou the ground of nullity. Mr Justice Butt : You may do that if you pleaso, but it is a dangerous ground, as I do not think it a reconcilable fact. It seems extremely unlikely that her story is absolutely true. You can either have a decree for a judicial separation now, or the case can be adjourned to enable you to amend your pleadings or procure further evidence as to cruelty, fhe case was then adjourned to enable learned counsel and his client to consult

8 to what course should be taken.