SUPREME COURT

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 7449, 25 May 1911, Page 5

SUPREME COURT

CRIMINAL SESSIONS ENDED A BAD CASE. The criminal sessions wore concluded before bis Honor the Chief Justice yesterday. Tho hearing of the charge of false pretences against a young man named AA’illiam James Geddys Hughes was proceeded with. Mr T. Neavo appeared for tho Crown, and Mr F. P. Kelly for the prisoner. The case for the prosecution was beard on Tuesday afternoon. It was alleged that he borrowed various sums amounting in all-to sonic £SO, _from two old people named Bialce at Karori, on the strength of a representation that he would shortly receive, money, about £225, from a property which bad been loft to him in AVales. It turned out, however, that be was entitled to succeed to this property only if ho wero married and had lawful issue. At the time he borrowed the money bo was not married. Prisoner gave evidence on his own behalf. Be said that at the time be told tho Blakes of money being due to bun he had cot 'understood that ho possessed no legal claim to the property unless ho married and had lawful issue. - The jury found the prisoner ‘‘Guilty.” His Honor described the case as a very bad one, and it was only on account of tho prisoner’s youth and the fact that he had not previously been convicted of any offence'that a lenient sentence of eighteen months’ imprisonment would be imposed. DIVORCE CASES DESERTION. Ellen AAUseman petitioned for the dissolution of her marriage with Ernest AA'iseman on the. ground of desertion. Mr F. E. Potherick appeared for the petitioner. The parties were married at Knmara ■on October IGtb, 1893. Respondent left hie home and loft the country thirteen years ago, and since then his wife has never heard from him. Tile husband was served in England, and ho did not appear ho defend the action. His Honor considered the evidence sufficient .to prove desertion, and granted a ■loci-ae nisi, with costs against tho rescondent. MISCONDUCT. • AVilliam Langford, about 30 years of age, prayed for a divorce from his wife, Florence Trnscott Langford on tile ground of adultery with one Noah Morgan, who was joined as co-respond-ent. Mr F. E. Petherick appeared for the petitioner. There was no appearance of respondent or co-respondent. The marriage took place on Novcipber 16tb, 1903, and they lived together for some six years. Petitioner suspected her of improper conduct as long as five years ago, and in the end his wife left him because of bis protests against her neglecting her home and going about with different men. A decree nisi was granted, with costs on the lowest scale against the co-rn-soondent. A SORRY TALE. It was a sordid tale that was told hy Caroline Forrest. Stapleton in support of her petition for a divorce from her husband Percival Ernest Stanletou. The grounds alleged were drunkenness, cruelty, and adultery. The parties were married on May 27th, 1896, at Christchurch, and there were two children of the marriage. Petitioner had lived with her husband “on and off” for some years until about two years ago, but he had been a habitual drunkard ever since their marriage. It was his habit to come home at night very drunk, disturb all tho household, and break furniture and glassware He had not supported her regularly, so that shortly after she was married she had to take a situation. For the last eight years she had been at work, supporting herself and. her children. Just before the final separation a few years ago she befriended a' young woman who had no other friends in‘AA 7el.lington, and took her to her house. Her husband misbehaved with this woman, and the pair insulted her frequently, until in the end the husband went awaywith the young woman. A decree nisi ivas granted with costs , against the respondent. 'Mr C. AA T . Ncilson appeared for the petitioner. AN IMMORAL LIFE. Herbert Montague Rosenberg petitioned for a divorce from Ada Rosenberg on the ground that cm numerous occasions from March 20th, 1909, she committed adultery with divers persons at 12, Upton terrace and .other places. Publication of the evidence was forbidden. , ... Mr AV. Perry appeared in support of the petition. A decree nisi was granted. COURT FIXTURES Thursday, May 2othHarrison v. Benzie, for £350 damages for loss on a bargain, etc. -Smart v. Levin (special case stated). „ , Friday, May 26thHadfield v. Hadfield (in divorce, wife’s petition); AValsh v. Fuller, claim _ for £ll4 10s damages for bodily injuries; SimpCon v. Cock-

ayne, breach of covenant alleged, claim £400; Taradalo Town Board v. A.M.PSociety (originating summons). Saturday, Hay 27th ;—Powick v. Heberley (originating summons). Monday, May 29th. i—Re Hsu Itorcugh - Brewery Co., petition to wind up the company; Angelini v. Antico, claim for £sllO for alleged libel. Tuesday, May 30lh s —Mewhinney v. Mcwhinney (in divorce, custody of children); Bonthorne v. Backstrom (common jury of four), motion for an injunction, etc. Wednesday, May 31stCudby v. Joseph (common jury), claim for £763 damages for bodily injuries; Reynolds v. the King, claim for £3(XW damages for dismissal; McKinley v. Mill, claim for .£IOO for damages to land caused by 'excavation or £IOO and an injunction; Thursday. June Ist; —Murphy v. Minister for Railways, claim for con pensation. Friday, June 2ndßate and Pike v. Wellington City, claim for compensation. Monday, June sth;—Baillie v. Wellington Harbour Board (special jury), a claim for £2OOO damages in respect of the death of John Patrick Baillie, who was killed while employed on the wharf on November 12th, 1910. Tuesday, June Cth Better v. Minister for Railways. , Wednesday, Juno 7thClaph'am v. Onslow Borough Council; AVaters v. Onslow Borough Council. Thursday, June Bth:—R-estone v. Silverstrcam Land Co, a claim for £173 16s 5d for interest alleged to be duo under an agreement. Friday, June oth Berry v. Wdmsett, for possession of land and £SO for mesne profits. Monday, June 13th Easson v, Wellington City (common jury), a claim for £ISOO damages for injuries to land.