A SHATTERED RUMANGE

New Zealand Times, Volume LI, Issue 11788, 26 March 1924, Page 7

A SHATTERED RUMANGE

AN AFFAIR OF THE TROPICS THE WIFE, THE HUSBAND, AND AN INDIAN WOMAN. CHARGES OF ADULTERY. The South Sea Islands axe popularly held to be specially dedicated to the goddess of love, but while many romances may be made there, some at least are shattered, and the unhappy parties of one such domestic tragedy, fought out their troubles in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday before Mr C. R. Orr-Walker. The case was one in which Robert Gilbert Broad appeared on warrant, issued at the instance of his wife, for failing to maintain her. Mr P. W. Jackson appeared for complainant, and Broad was represented by Mr G. G. Watson. ALLEGED WRONGFUL ARREST. “Before proceeding with the case,” said Mr Watson, “I have a serious objection to make. "The defendant lias been wrongfully arrested and illegally detained. He is not domiciled in New Zealand, nor has he committed any offence here.” Counsel submitted that the court had been deceived, into issuing the warrant. The husband occupied a responsible position with the C-olonial Sugar Refining Company, aiid he had been arrested on the eve of returning to Fiji after searching in New Zealand Tor his wife who had -deserted him. “1 contend,” said Mr Watson, ‘‘that the 'warrant was cruelly and wickedly served on him.” THE WIFE'S STORY.

Mr Jackson explained that Hie parties had been married in 1918, there being three children bofn to them. In 1914 they went to La Basa, in Fiji, where they had lived until October, 1923, when Mrs Broad had left Tor Auckland, her husband having practically driven her out of his'home. The defendant had been mixed up in an affair vitli an India woman, and had admitted as muoli to a solicitor.

Mr Watson: Yon are not' balling him, ;nd you have no right to open the nutter. Mr Jackson: What nenseuAe. It is ■utterly impossible to get a solicitor from Fiji. In any case, he hah admitted his misconduct in his letter to complainant.

Defendant said he had. arranged for his wife’s passage 'to Auckland, had given her £SO, and had remitted -other suns to her at different tunes while she was away. Defendant had written to her, arranging for her to return to the islands, but before 'the letter ’ar-. rived, countermanded the instructions. Defendant had then coine to "New Zealand, tut had failed to call on hie wife ■who was living at Johnsehville, and was arrested in Auckland a few days before he was due to Return by the steamer to the islands. Letters Bad passed oetween them during their separatioi, and while it was admitted that defendant’s were mostly conclud- ■ ed in alectionate strains, they -contained references Which, it was alleged, supported the charge of misconduct with an Indian woman. HUSBAND AND INDIAN WOMAN. The complainant, in evidence, stated that her husband had at first denied that he had been unfaithful to her, but had later admitted that he had been , carrying-on with an Indian woman. As a result ot fhe trouble that followed, he had ordered her to get out of the house, and eventually She came over to Auckland, arriving there on October 26th last year, her husband promising to follow tour weeks later. She had no choice but to leave, 'because her husband had. said that if she did not, he would blow his brains out. Mt Jackson: In one hie letters to you, he mentions a man named H. O. Smith. Is there anything between yon and this man.—No, nothing whatever. Mr Jackson: Who is this H. O. Smith?—He is a old resident of the Islands, and a great friend of my husband's. Mr Watson: You never liked the tropics, did you?—l have always been very 'fond of the tropics. MV Watson: Yet every time yon left them, your husband had the greatest troume in getting yOu .back again. Did your husband’s father have to Write to you once when you were in Wellington, telling you that it Was your duty to come back? —He told me it was my duty to return to toy hueband. Mr Watson: Was net moSt of the trouble due to you mixing with the natives, and letting things slide in the heme?—l never mixed with the natives; my husband did, though. ALLEGATIONS DENIED. Mr Watson: Who saw you-off by the boat at Suva?—-No one. in particular, Mr Smith was there with some others. Mr Watson: Oh I Mr Smith. Who kissed you good-bye on the gangway when you were leaving. Was it Mr Smith ? You deny that Smith embraced you publicly just before the boat left? — 1 do deny it. And if I can call a lot of respectable European witnesses to swear he -did, you will say they are telling lies? —l will say so, most emphatically. I never kissed anyone in Suva. What is the explanation of the letter which you sent to Smith saying you would never forget hie kiesses and hugs?—l never sent such a letter. If you have one, it must be a forgery. Then you deny absolutely that yom committed adultery with anyone in Fiji?—Most certainly. Or that your husband ever charged you with it?—l do. What about these references in his letters?

Mr Jack-son: Those refer to “carrying on,” and “this funny business,” and such terms as that. There Is no shargo of adultery. “KISSING AND HUGGING.”

His Worship: That is right, Mr Watlon. The letters only speak of kissing tod hugging, and things like that. Mr Watson: Well, the one is often laken to imply "the other. His Worship: Oh, not necessarily, especially in tiio Blands. Mr Watson: Of course, my experience of island life is brief.

In answer to His Worship, complainmt eaid that sho was prepared to overook her husband’s misconduct and ive with him again if he left Fiji, hut he could not go back there because f the disgrace incurred by his affairs rith the Indian woman. The Indians 11 knew the story and chattered about t in front of her children.