DIVORCES SOUGHT

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22355, 28 February 1936, Page 14

DIVORCES SOUGHT

UNDEFENDED PETITIONS MANY DECREES GRANTED SEQUELS TO SEPARATION CASE OF WIFE'S BIGAMY Forty-eight undefended divorce cases were set down for hearing by Mr. Justice Blair at the Supreme Court yesterday, but they were not all completed when the Court rose for the day. The majority of the petitions were based on allegations of separation for more than three years. All but one of the petitions heard was granted. Proof of his wife's bigamy was given by Robert Etenry Williams (Mr. Slipper) m support of his petition, ior divorce from Marjorie Amelia Ruby Williams on the ground of misconduct. Ronald Henry MeKcnzie was named as co-respondent. Petitioner said his wife and he separated about IS months ago. On October 14 last she was charged in the Police Court with committing bigamy with the co-respondent and pleaded guilty. His Honor issued a decree nisi. " He just walked out. I have had the children ever since," said \ iolet Lilian Veale .(Mr. Nutsford) in seeking dissolution of her marriage with Thomas Veale. Petitioner said she was married in May, 1916, and her husband left her in November. 1925, when she was in hospital. She had not seen him since. She had four children. A decree nisi was granted with interim custody of the children. Husband and Chauffeur The statement that her husband, William Jackson, a retired solicitor, wanted her to dismiss her chauffeur and let him drive the car for a chauffeur's'wage was made by Louisa AVinifred Jackson, who sought divorce on the ground of wilful desertion. '■'"As a matter of fact, he was incapable of driving a car," said Mr. Singer, who appeared for the petitioner. Witness produced a separation agreement Which the respondent had refused to sign, petitioner said, on the ground that if he did so he would have to wait three years for a divorce. His Honor said he was not prepared to make an order on that, and adjourned the case. Divorce was sought by Nellie Morgain Cossey' (Mr. Sullivan) from Edward Cossey on the ground of separation since' May, 1912. The petitioner, who elected to* take the oath by affirmation, said she was married to the respondent in January, 1901, and there were two children. "When they agreed to separate 24 years ago, the question of mainten- ; ance was not raised as she had private means. They had been apart ever since. 5 A decree nisi was issued. * A Difficult Witness Considerable difficulty was experienced both by Eis Honor and by her -counsel, Mr. Singer, in obtaining from Ruth Timms details of a verbal separation agreement she had made with her husband, Moniguar Timms. Witness persisted in making various allegations against her husband who was a bushman. - Asked about an arrangement under which he was to make to her payments witness said, "He did not pay anything until I ' pulled ' him for it." She got an order for 10s a week, bir: he had paid her only £3 10s since 1928. His Honor granted a decree nisi. " We just co'ild not agree," said Etty Maria Biglands (Mr. Nutsford) when ksked about the cause of her separation from Charles Edgar Biglands. " He agreed to go his way and I agreed to go mine. He agreed to pay me 10s a week." Petitioner said she had custody of-the child. They were married in June, 1927, and the separation took place in November. 1931 His Honor granted a decree. A Birthday Present Complaining that her husband had been of drunken habits and that he had not maintained her, Ada Frost (Mr. Hogben) petitioned for divorce from Linton Thomas Frost on the ground of desertion. She said she had had to maintain herself and that her husband had given her only £1 in the course of four years. He said it was a birthday present She had had to leave him in January. 1932. The decree sought was granted. On the ground of desertion decrees nisi were granted to the petitioners in the following cases: —Sylvia Leah Moxsom (Mr. Matthews), against Edgar N. T. Moxsom; Ivy Seaton (Mr. Nutsford) against Andrew A. J. Seaton; Isabel Knowles (Mr. Dickson) against George Knowles. On the ground of the respondent's misconduct Malcolm Nicoll (Mr. Field) was granted a decree nisi against Estelle Nicoll, William Jones being cited as co-respondent. Walter E. A. Subritzky (Mr. Dickson) was granted a decree against Elsie May # Subritzky. The' respondent having failed to comply with an order of the Court for restitution of conjugal rights His Honor issued decrees nisi in the following cases:—Walter Henry Caves (Mr. Garland) against Winifred Marjorie Caves; Basil "William Frederick Craddock (Mr. Meek) against Maud Amelia Craddock; Ivan Franich (Mr. Dickson) against Edith Agnes Franich; Gwendoline Marjorie Thomson (Mr. R. E. Taylor) against Frederick Cecil Thomson; Roderick Ernest Mackay (Mr. Singer) against Mary E. N. Mackay. Cases of Separation Separation for a period of over three years was the ground on which decrees nisi were granted in the following cases: —Norman McGregor Smith (Mr. N. Wilson) against Eleanor Frieda Smith; Helen Ramsay Thomson (M*. L. C. Adams) against Mervyn James Willis Thomson; Maisie Agustus Phillips (Mr. Nutsford) against Thomas Phillips; Marjorie Irene Thomas (Mr. Sellar) against Richard Ifwerson Thomas; Violet Rose Crawford (Mr. Schramm) against Henry Foreman Crawford; Reta Gibson (Mr. Schramm) agajnst W T illiam • Ellesmere Gibson; Ethel Adelaide Reese (Mr. Dickson) against Ralph Louis Reese; James Giles (Mr. Schramm) against Grace Helen Giles; Florence Edith Emma Tuohy (Mr. R. Meredith) against Frederick Michael Tuohy. Miria.m Florence Roff (Mr. Nutsford) against Franc-is Edward Roff; James Castleford Thompson (Mr. Wood) against Mabel Thompson; Eileen May .Johnson (Mr. Stevens) against Albert John Johnson; Mona Lucy Wheeler (Mr...Jenkins) against Russell Wheeler; Bessie Bree (Mr. McLiver), against Arthur Bree; Kathleen L. R. Williams (Mr. Singer) against Ralph Augustus Williams.