CURIOUS POSITION

New Zealand Times, Volume LI, Issue 11826, 12 May 1924, Page 7

CURIOUS POSITION

REVEALED IN ALIMONY SUIT WIFE'S SUCCESSFUL CLAIM FOB MAINTENANCE. AFTER TWENTY-ONE YEARS. A somewhat curious position was revealed in the Supreme Court on Saturday when Mr Justice Chapman delivered his judgment in a matter recently before him. The proceedings arose out a petition for alimony by a wife, the respondent in an original suit for divorce. “In a case of this kind I often feel as other judges must at times feel that it is impossible to make a really satisfactory order, that is to 6ay one with which I nyself feel quite satisfied,” said His Honour. “All that I can say that having tried my best to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion, what I now decide to do represents the best course that I have found myself able to take.” Ill© parties were Charles Ernest Tuoker and Blanche Tucker; Mr O. C. Mazengarb appearing for the former, and Mr C. A. L. Treadwell for the wife. They were married in England, where ! they .were then domiciled in 1893. The petitioner was a year older than the respondent, and subsequent history showed that a child was born within the normal period of gestation. “This probably throws some light on the origin of the marriage and the kind of marriage it was.” added His Honour. Tho present petitioner stated that Tucker divorced her and left her in England in 1896. This- was denied. He asserted that his wife had deserted him some time before he left. Tuoker, said the petitioner, was a butcher employed in Wellington. He filed his petition in divorce in 1922, alleging desertion. “He is candid enough to state,” remarked His Honour, “that his object in sueing for a divorce 26 rears after the alleged desertion is that he may marry again.” When this matter came before Mr Justice Hceking ho considered that tho case was really one of separation and living apart hy mutual consent, and. after the petition had been amended the decree was mode on this ground. “DRIFTED APART.” “All the facts seem to me to point, tO' the parties, having, sc to speak, drifted opart. The wife had her parents at hand and turned to them for assistance. Neither party sought to ascertain the whereabouts of tho other. Tucker knew that he could find his wife Hi rough her father, if tho ; father was alive, and in this way he - found her when ho wanted to take ! divorce proceedings Mrs j'Fucker showed no desire to pursue him i for divorce or maintenance even when jhe petitioned, and she filed an answer ; which she afterwards abandoned.” i Tho position, however, said the judge, ihad now chanced. “I assume that I apart from the imputation of desertion both parties really desired and welcomed Ihe divorce,” ho added “Then that imputation was abandoned and before ths decree was made absoi lute Mrs Tucker realised that she had I some sort of right which she had not intentionally waived when abandoning ho? defence.” j “This. I think, is her position, though she not claim maintenance uoitil then, although the matter of the abandonment of her defence and the payment of costs hy the petitioner was brou’ght before the court. The fact I is that her real position was first dis- ! closed to her by tho service, of the ; petition. and then more fully .by the j subsequent proceedings in which she i has exnlicitly or otherwise waived nny'thong.” The ground of divorce ultimatelv relied on was unknown in England as a ground for any kind of relief. # “I do rot think, however, that there is anything in the history to suggest that Mrs Tucker was In a helpless nosit ion. At her age. about 54, any of the elder relations who helped her must be djung out, but ehe is entitled to some assistance from other quarters, and is not wholly capable of earning anything.” He thought that a'c&se for mitigated assistance and support had been made out, and made an order at the rate of 10s per week.