MARITAL DISCORD

Northern Advocate, 16 September 1932, Page 3

MARITAL DISCORD

j PETITION FOR. DISSOLUTION, i I BASED ON WRITTEN DOCUMENT. (Per Press Association.— Copyright.) WELLINGTON, This Day. A petition for dissolution of marriage was brought in the Supremo Court yesterday by Thomas Moorcock, a Wairarapa. farmer, against Alice Frances Moorcock. The petition was based on a written agreement entered into by the parties in April, 1029. The wife is defending the petition on the ground that separation of the parties was caused by the wrongful frets and conduct of the petitioner. The marriage took place on January 1, IOOS, stated petitioner, and he lived with his wife until April 15, 1929. He then entered into a separation agreement. There was one child, a son, born in November, 1908. Counsel for respondent said that witnesses would say that respondent was always a good wife, kept a good, clean home and that, it was petitioner’s neglect which widened the breach that eventually led to separation. There was no doubt that wrongful acts and conduct by' petitioner caused the separation, counsel added, Mrs. Moorcock, in evidence, said that she and her husband lived happily until 1929. Her husband prospered and-was able to buy a motor car, and, from that time, his manner changed towards her. He developed a fixed habit of going out and leaving her. At times he stayed away all night, and at other times ho went away for the week-end. It was alleged that the petitioner became friendly with another woman and subsequently transferred his affections to various women in the district and neglected his wife. When she was ordered into hospital in Wellington in 1928, respondent continued, her husband refused to take her in the ear or allow h'is son to take her in it. He gave her £3 and she went in a service car. He did not visit her and wrote only one note, in load pencil. After she left the hospital she went for a trip to the .Islands with her sister. On her return he made accusations against her in respect of a native. Driven to desperation, she ultimately consented to separation, and signed a document without seeking legal advice. She maintained herself by money obtained from the sale of eggs. Evidence was given by Frank Thomas Moorcock and two neighbours, after which the court adjourned until to-day.