AN UNHAPPY MARRIAGE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVI, Issue 14174, 24 September 1909, Page 6

AN UNHAPPY MARRIAGE.

PARLIAMENTARY CANDIDATE.

WIFE GETS A DIVORCE

" KICKED HER OUT OF BED."

[BY TELEGRAPH.— CORRESPONDENT.]

v Gisborne, Thursday. Some interest attached to a case in the Divorce Court this afternoon from the fact that respondent was a member of the Education Board and School Committee, and contested the Gisborne seat with the Hon. J. Carroll at the lost general election. The case was Lilian Mary Darton (petitioner) v. Geo. Edward Darton (respondent). Respondent did not appear. Petitioner, now a nurse in the Waipukurau Hospital, stated that she was married to respondent at Mornington, Dunedin, on December 27, 1899, and.came to Gisborne about the middle of June, ISOO. Respondent ordered her from his room, and they parted until some months later.* She was again ordered from him about two years afterwards. In the meantime she went to her parents at Pahiatua. Respondent ill-treated her .because she did not get out of bed at six o'clock in the morning and get him a cup of tea. He kicked her out of bed. • All through he had illtreated her. He had often slapped her in the face and giveii her a black eye on two occasions. •'■'•■..' His Honor inquired the reason of this ill-treatment, and petitioner said it was because of her objection to respondent's familiarity with another woman. He threw any object handy at her, and never spoke to her unless he ill-treated her. Her credit was stopped at the shops. Her reason for leaving respondent was because he dragged her from the table and on the floor when her mother came in. This was in November, 1902, and as a consequence she took proceedings for assault in the Magistrate's 'Court " (certificate of conviction produced), : He had sent her no money, and she had since supported herself, being now at the Waipukurau Hospital. / His Honor remarked that petitioner should have found out respondent's temper during the five years she had known him prior to the marriage. Mrs. Cross, of Dunedin, mother of the petitioner, said she stayed with petitioner in June following the marriage. She noticed that things were not too well, but respondent promised to behave better. Upon a second occasion she stayed a week, when things were worse. Respondent attempted to bundle her out, and she pretended to go away, but hid behind the piano. When respondent came in to tea he abused his wife, and hearing petitioner, cry out witness went and saw respondent in the act of striking petitioner. After a struggle, respondent bundled them both out, and locked the doors and windows. ' Oh this occasion she found petitioner black and blue. '

. His Honor said he would grant a decree nisi. Respondent by turning his wife out had practically deserted her, and it was quite clear that she could not live with him. He had turned her out (which was actual desertion), and had refused to live with her. This had continued for five years, and ; there was no doubt that the secret of the trouble was the familiarity and the fancy he had taken for some other woman. 'He had lost that natural affection he should have had for his wife.. It was an exceedingly bad case. He would make the decree nisi to be made, absolute in three months.