DIVORCE CASE.

Marlborough Express, Volume XLVI, Issue 116, 14 May 1912, Page 7

DIVORCE CASE.

CONINGJIAM v. GONINGHAM. TPBESS )ASSOCIATION.) ' WELLINGTON, May 13. 1 Memories of a sensational divorce case heard in Sydney in 1901 were revived by a trial which; commenced in the Supreme Court to-day, when Alice Coningham sued for divorce from her husband, Arthur Coningham, on the ground of adultery- The case is ibeing heard' before Mr Justice Chapman and a "jury. An application to have the case heard in camera, was declined^ the Judge stating that he might have to order that some of the evidence be not published. ' Respondent asked that a cross netition be heard at the same time, but his Honor said that that matter was not set down, and he could not try it. : Petitioner, in her evidence, said that she was married in Sydney in 1893. - There we.re three children of the marriage. She lived with her Tmsband until 1900, when they separated for a time. About three years ago respondent went away. He had not really maintained her for twelve yoars. Petitioner also gave evidence concerning whatjhad led'1 her to suspect her husband's'conduct.