HUSBANDS AND WIVES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LII, Issue 16098, 11 December 1915, Page 5

HUSBANDS AND WIVES.

CLAIMS FOR SEPARATION.

TWO CASES ADJOURNED.

An application for a separation order and maintenance was made at the Magistrate's Court yesterday before Mr. E. C. Cutten, S.M., by Ann Jane Nelson (Mr.. Hall Skelton) against her husband, Emil i Frederick Nelson (Mr. J. G. Haddow). The parties were married in 1909, applicant being then a widow, and both she and defendant having families. After a hearing which had extended over six hours, the magistrate said that he failed quite to see why he should be asked for a judgment in the matter, seeing that it was obvious that neither of the parties desired that they should again live together. It appeared to him a case in which they should endeavour to arrange amicably as to their financial settlement, leather than make a separation order— though one would be justified by the circumstances suggested that the parties should arrange for separation by deed, on the basis of a payment by defendant of £1 per week. The case was formally adjourned till next Friday, to enable the parties to carry out the suggested arrangement, in which both sides expressed concurrence. WIFE'S ALLEGED LIKING FOR RACES. SUGGESTED HEALTH TRIP. An application was made by Harriet Smith (Air. B. P. Cahill) for separation from her husband, John Charles Smith (Mr. A. Moody), and an order for maintenance. The applicant stated that she had been married for fifteen years, and had four children. It transpired that the case had already 1 been before another magistrate (Mr. ; Kettle), when it had been arranged that the applicant, who, it was stated, was in a highly nervous condition, and was in the habit of attending races, should go away for a holiday, and, in particular, should absent herself from racecourses; and yet that two days afterwards she had been seen at the Takapuna races. The magistrate considered that the circumstances were such that there ought to be a holiday separation between husband and wife. He advised, as a means towards the restoration of amicable relations, that defendant should agree to supply his wife with the necessary means of taking a recuperative trip. Counsel and Bench endeavoured to lead the litigants to a reasonable frame of mind, and arrange for the proposed health trip, but both were obdurate, and preferred to continue the ventilation of their troubles.

The cross-examination suggested that the line of defence would be that applicant's allegations were the result of a hysterical condition, and were without foundation; that defendant had adequately provided for his wife and treated her reasonably; and that applicant's racing propensities had been indulged in to the detriment of her household duties. After further evidence had been heard, the case was adjourned till Monday afternoon.