ACTIONS FOE DIVORCE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LVIII, Issue 17881, 8 September 1921, Page 6

ACTIONS FOE DIVORCE.

A PETITION DEFENDED.

ALTERNATIVE GROUNDS.

A petition for divorce, based alternatively on desertion or separation, was brought by Sarah Jane Marshall (Mr. Singer) against Ernest Edward Marshall (Mr. Pullen), painter, before Mr. Justice Adams at the Supreme Court yesterday. The case was set down for hearing before a jury, but owing to the fact that the jury was dismissed for the day counsel agreed that it be heard before the Judge alone.

Petitioner gave evidence that she was married in ISBS, and within a few years quarrel* arose between herself and respondent,' who had a bad, sulky temper and would not speak for days at a time. In April, 1908, he left her and offered uer 15s a week for the support of herself and three young children. The following month he wrote and said: " I know 1 have a nasty temper. Only give me a ehance to win back the love you ones.bore me. You have been a good wife and mother, only give me a chance to make you and the children happy." She gave him another chance, but in 1910 he left her in a temper, returning later. In May, 1911, the parties were not on speaking terms for three weeks, at the end of which respondent asked when she was going. Petitioner replied when she was ready, and he retorted that it would look well if he threw her boxes out on the verandah. She and her son left him that day, and for two years she supported herself. In April, 1913, 6he met a man with whom she bad been living and whom she now wished to marry. Albert Edward Charles Marshall, a son of petitioner, gave evidence that he frequently had to settle quarrels and interfere in the interests of peace. The respondent said the parties had nine children. Ho denied having a bad temper or having deserted petitioner. On the occasion on which she finally left he had broken a three weeks' silence bv saving things would have to alter. On bis return from Work she was gone. Two years laW »ben she was in hospital she refused t* xee him. Even though she had lived wt<h another man respondent wanted her back. His home had always been open to her, but af'er writing to her to psk her to return be considered he had done his duty.

His Honor reserved judgment.

DECREE NISI GRANTED.

DEED OF SEPARATION.

Based on a deed of separation drawn up in May, 1917, Abraham Henry Keesing (Mr. Dickson), watchmaker, of Auckland, sought dissolution of marriage with Isabella Keesing (Mr. Hogben). The case was set down to be heard by a jury, but upon certain allegations in respondent's answers being withdrawn, the action was brought before the Judge alone. The petitioner said he was married in March, 1886, in Australia, and came to Auckland about 30 years ago. There were six children. Owing to unhappy differences petitioner and respondent signed a deed of separation over three yearn ago and had lived apart, respondent being allowed 10s a week maintenance. His Honor granted a decree nisi with costs, £10 10s, to respondent. Counsel for respondent agreed that the maintenance should continue meanwhile, and ins question of alimony be settled later.