DIVORCE SUIT FAILS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18565, 24 November 1923, Page 13

DIVORCE SUIT FAILS.

HUSBAND'S ALLEGATIONS.

BOARDING HOUSE INCIDENT

MISCONDUCT NOT PROVED.

A defended divorce case, in "which , a man made allegations of adultery against his wife, was heard in the Supreme Court yesterday before Mr. Justice Stringer. Henry Barnes (Mr. Sullivan) was the petitioner, and Maud Elsie Barnes (Mr. Vallance), the respondent. James McKenzie, civil servant, of Rotorua (Mr. Holmden), was named as corespondent, from whom petitioner sought £501 damages. Mr. Sullivan said the marriage took place in August, 1916, and there -were two children, custody of whom was sought by the petitioner. Barnes was an engine-driver, and the parties lived at Waiuku, To Kuiti, and Putaruru. Until they went to Putaruru they got on very well together, but there Barnes grew suspicious of his wife being on familiar terms with another man. As a result of the trouble Mrs. Barnes left her husband. In 1921, she obtained an order for separation and maintenance for the children. Eventually Mrs. Barnes went to Kfetorua as a waitress. Two inouiry agents, employed by Barnes, stayed at the boarding house where she was employed, and on specific occasions saw Mrs. Barnes and co-respondent, who was a boarder, in compromising positions. Barnes alleged that adultery occurred on August 11, s. 1923. The petitioner gave evidence on these lines. He related the events which occurred on the particular evening when he and the inquiry agent found McKenzie in his wife's room. Inquiry. Agent's Evidence. Evidence was given by boarders at the house of a conversation between themselves and McKenzie. In reply to one man's statement that McKenzie was a fool to carry on with a married woman, McKenzie replied he knew his business. McKenzie also said that he himself was married. The witnesses gave evidences of the familiarity of Mrs. Barnes and McKenzie, but denied that they had gone to live at the boarding house for the purpose of spying on Mrs. Barnes. One inquiry agent said that, on an earlier occasion/ he went into McKenzie's room, pretending to be intoxicated. Mrs. Barries and McKenzie were there. Another agent said he saw McKenzie go into Mrs. Barnes' room, c frying a gramaphone. The musio played for some time, but after it had ceased, witness and Barnes looked into the room through the window, as the door was locked. Mr. Vallance, for respondent, said the defence was one of absolute denial. The two men were entirely mistaken, and went with their minds made up, and misconstrued perfectly innocent., matters. McKenzie, Mrs. Barnes and a girl were in the room, which in common with the other staff, was used as a bed-sitting room. In evidence, Mrs. Barnes said the girl had just gone from the room a few minutes to get supper, and McKenzie and she were sitting in her room, when the window suddenly went up and a light flashed in the room. " I rushed to the window," said respondent, " and McKenzie went to the door. I could hear men running and they kicked up an awful noise." There was absolutely no truth in the allegations. The door was not locked, as there was no key to it, but it was "difficult to open. Cross-examined, Mrs. Barnes said she had been in McKenzie's room, but never as late as 11 p.m. Nothing had taken place between McKenzie and herself.

Respondent Denies Allegations. James McKenzie said he was a single man. When • the - light flashed he was sitting in the chair by the gramaphone. He denied adultery at that or any other time. He admitted that Mrs. Barnes had been in his room on some occasions, but he did not think there was anything wrong in that. Evidence was given by the proprietress of the boarding house of the undisturbed state of the room after the incident. She had observed no looseness of character as far as Mrs. Barnes was concerned. His Honor said it seemed to him that the evidence was wholly insufficient to prove the woman guilty. It was very easy for people to see what they wanted to see. He asked the juiy to answer the question: "Has Mrs. Barnes been guilty of adultery with this-man ?": The jury's reply was , a negative one, and a verdict was- entered for respondent with costs on the lowest scale, with witnesses' expenses. /..?