WHAT IS EVIDENCE IN A DIVORCE CASED.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXIII, Issue 7650, 29 May 1886, Page 2 (Supplement)

WHAT IS EVIDENCE IN A DIVORCE CASED.

The petition of Mr. Charles WilaJon, a commercial traveller in the stationery line, came before the Divorce Court, London, lately, for a divorce by reason of his wife's adultery with tho co-respondent, Dr. James Murray Smith, in practice at who denied the charge. The marriage took place on March S, 1.574, and the petitioner and the respondent aitorwards lived together at Rom ford. In ISSo Mrs. VViladoawae ill, and the co-respondent was called in. Between them it was alleged that an undue intimacy took place in Stamford-street, Romford, after she left her hushaud. Ultimately sho confessed to the petitioner what had taken place, and wrote a letter pleading for forgiveness, stating that she would like to strangle Dr. Smith, and wishing that she had never see him.—ln the evidence? it was shown that the respondent was visited by a gentleman, but there was no identification. — Mr. Justice Jsutt accordingly held that, although there was evidence of tho wife's misconduct, there was no legal testimony which tho Court could receive «3 against tho co-respondent, who would be dismissed from the petition. As, however, Dr. Kinith hud corresponded with a lady patient; separated from her husband, ha would not have his coats allowed.—A decrco nisi was granted.