IN DIVORCE.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLVIII, Issue 304, 21 November 1928, Page 7

IN DIVORCE.

UNDEFENDED PETITIONS. Undefended divorce petitions were dealt with by His Honour, Mr Justice Smith, at the Supreme Court this morning. Thomas Wright Mustlier petitioned for a dissolution of his marriage with Jane Eleanor Mustlier on the ground that respondent had allegedly been confined to a mental asylum for seven years and upwards. Petitioner, for whom Mr Rolling appeared, gave evidence that his wife had been in Avondale Asydum continuously from 1912, and was unlikely to recover. Mr Cooke, who appeared for the guardian ad litem of the respondent, the Solicitor-General, confirmed this. A decree nisi was granted, to be moved absolute in three months. ALLEGED DESERTION. Edith Eliza Ingram (Mr Cooper) sought a divorce from Charles W. Ingram on the grounds of desertion. In evidence, petitioner said that they wero married in 1905 and had lived in various places, coming to Palmerston North in 1922. At that time petitioner and her husband were not getting along too well, and when her husband went away on a business trip he said: “I may, or may not, come back.” Since then he had allowed her the free use of the house, keeping the interest paid up, and had later given her 10s a week maintenance. Respondent was a flaxmiller, and conditions were bad in the flax industry just now. His Honour: Did he desert you against your will? Petitioner: Oh, T wouldn’t say that. He simply went. . His Honour (to Mr Cooper): This looks liko separation, not desertion. To obtain a divorce you must be able to spell out a clear mutual agreement of separation. In this case, respondent has gone on maintaining his wife, and the position is not very clear. Continuing her evidence, petitioner said that last August, when down here in connection with maintenance proceedings, respondent declared that he would never return. . Mrs F. M. Johnston, a sister ot petitioner, said that, since leaving his wife in 1921, respondent had not returned. , , ~ , . His Honour said that he would take timo to consider whether the evidence proved desertion. Heather Dench (Mr Oram) petitioned for a divorce from Cecil James Dench, on the grounds of alleged wilful desertion. Petitioner in evidence said that she had been married in February, 1923, and had gone to live on a farm at Te Matai. After 18 months she and her husband had given this up and lived in Ferguson Street, Palmerston North. While there she had been taken ill, and had gone to live with her mother to be cared for. When she was at her mother’s place, respondent had sold up the house and had gone to Hastings. Since then he had contributed nothing to the support of witness or the child of the marriage. The mother of the petitioner gave corroborative evidence. A decree nisi was granted, to be made absolute in three months, with the custody of the child to petitioner. Respondent was ordered to pay costs and disbursements on tho lowest 6cale. Keith Alexander Cameron, farmer, of Koputaroa (Mr Onglev) petitioned for a .divorce from Ethel Frances Cameron on the grounds of dessertion. In evidence, petitioner stated that the marriage had taken place on May 27, 1925, at Hastings. They had lived at Koputaroa for three months, when his wife had left him and gone to Hastings. Since September, 1920, he had not heard from her, and she gave no sign of returning. John Cameron, of Newbury, farmer, father of the petitioner, gave corroborative evidence. Petitioner was working on witness’s farm, and he knew that respondent had not lived with petitioner for some years. A decree nisi was granted. restitution of conjugal rights. Ulisse Arturo W. Robinson (Mr Kelling) petitioned for an or<Jer of restitution of conjugal rights against Ins wife, Marjorie Sybil Robinson. , In his evidence petitioner stated that he was married to respondent in March 1916, at Wellington, and “Aea.h.d lived in v.nooe parts of the capital city and at Palmerston North His wife had left min last June to go and work, apparently preasking her to return, but she would n °Rob°ertHopkirk stated that he knew that respondent left home last and had not returned since, preferring said that the evidence was satisfactory, but dl^ te h described respondent C “Sybil” ■ ” respondent had signed it M When this was rectified, the docume \ could be forwarded to Hie Honour a Wanganui where he would deal with them. . -^^^-nrrfTTP

decrees absolute. Decrees absolute were made in the following petitions m Jivoree, , t petitioner being mentioned h each case: —Clifford ~4°^;^’r i ,e rt ) seller, of Dannevirke (Mr v. Mary Holroyd Ackroyd, with■ cus tody of the children to the wife by consent; Ira Vallon AHan Dobbie, ot Ohakune, solicitor (Mr Clayton) Ida Mary Dobbie, with custody ot th child to 7 petitioner; Mary Emily Cecelia Allen (Mr Cooper) • Glover Allen, with custody of thei chiM to petitioner; Florence May y (Mr Cooper) v. James Dpnaldv nolds, of Mastcrton, printer s ployee.