THE SUPREME COURT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LI, Issue 15663, 17 July 1914, Page 4

THE SUPREME COURT.

APPLICATION FOR DIVORCE, ■ WIFE WHO RAN AWAY. A PETITION in divorce was heard at th« Supreme Court yesterday morning, when. James Welshman McKonzio fought ; ' dissolution of his marriage with Margaret La Bona, McKenzic on tho ground of desertion. The petitioner was represented by Mr. R. A. Singer, but there was no appearance on behalf of the respondent. Petitioner, Who holds a position as officer on a steamer, gave evidence to the effect that he married respondent in February, 1899. After the marriage they lived in Graham Street, off Victoria Street and for a time everything went well. Then ho began to hear rumours about his wife and he taxed her with them, and trouble. began. About February, 1901, the climax was reached, Returning from one. of his seafaring trips, petitioner found his houso in disorder and his wife missing. o a table ho found a photograph, on which tho respondent had written, "Not dead, but gone before." Petitioner then stayed with his friend, James Toohey, a neighbour, for three or four weeks, leaving his own house vacant 80 that his wife could come back to it again if she so desired. Since then ho hud seen her two or three, times and hod urged her to come home. After travelling in many parts of the world ho again met his wife in 1905 and sho asked him lo make provision for her. He complied with the request, and from that date, from whatever part of tho world ho had been in, ho had send her £2 10s Dor mouth. The respondent was now resident in Sydney and had filed no defence.

James Toohcy, who resided next door to the McKenzies in Graham Street, stated that ho had been friends with the petitioner for 20 years. Witness's wife and respondent became friendly and visited one another. Later, however, witness began to hear rumours from the neighbours about respondent, and he nailed up .tho boards of the fence between the two houses, as ho considered the respondent was not good, company for his wife. hen. the petitioner found the respondent missing ho came to witness's house in a very distressed state. A decree nisi was granted, to bo made absolute after three months'. NO PROVISION FOR WIDOW. A WILL DISPUTED. An action was brought by Lilly Ede, widow of Albert Ede, late of Avondale, against James Thomas Annan, executor in the estate, to show cause why an order should not be made under the Family Protection Act, by which plaintiff should receive provision out-of the estate of tho deceased. Tho amplication was made owing to the fact that deceased had made a will without making provision for the adequate maintenance and support of his widow. Mr. J. B. Johnston appeared for the plaintiff, Mr. W. E. Hackctt for the executor, and the Eon. J. A. Tole, K.C., for a boy not provided for in the will.

Mr. Johnston said that plaintiff had a child to whom the deceased had bequeathed the estate. Prior to the husbands death the wife and husband had been - living apart, Last year the wife sought a anaintenanco order in the Magistrate's Court, and the magistrate suggested that tho parties should confer with a view to a reconciliation. While matters were iri this position the husband died. The night/ before he died he made his will, leaving the wife nothing, all the property beingj left to a son. Mrs. Ede returned to hen husband the night beforo his deathi Counsel urged that the case was one] in which reasonable provision should bdj made for the widow. x- i Mr. Tole said the value of the estatewag very small. It had been locked up since the husband committed suicide in December, and there was some question as to how the circumstances of the husband's death might affect the value of the property. His Honor remarked that tho value of the estate was so small it was a pity that it was necessary to have brought the matter into Court. ',

• Mrs. Ede then gave evidence, and said that for years prior to her husband'si death she had been keeping herself, She had been living apart from her husband for three months prior to his death. Since then she had been unable to work owing to a nervous breakdown, James T. Annan, the executor in tho estate, stated that deceased was i* sober, honest workman of excellent character. Ho did not think the plaintiff should bo ■given the custody of tb.6 child. \ As executor, witness had endeavoured to sell the house, comprising deceased's es-. tate, but owing to the nature of Ede'a death, buyers appeared reluctant in com. inn forward, Mr. Tolo, who appeared for a son of deceased by a previous marriage, said that as his client wis 17 years of age and was earning £3 a week ho was possibly in a position which would warrant his being left out of any distribution on account of the estate being so small. His Honor said that a new will could not be made by the Court, but the Court could interfere with it so far as was necessary to bring it into lino with tliu Family Protection Act. Ho mad© an order giving tho widow 7s 6d per week and her son 10s. These sums might bo increased if the estate proved to be larger than was indicated. His Honor specified that tho sura due to her son should bo paid to the mother until tho further order of tho Court. Costs were allowed to all parties cut of the estate.