ALFRED HILL'S FIRST WIFE

NZ Truth, Issue 881, 14 October 1922, Page 6

ALFRED HILL'S FIRST WIFE

Divorced For Desertion No Home; No Alimony. . . Parliament Petitioned. For months past many good folk In Wellington have been perturbed •ver the parlous plight m which Mrs Alfred Hill, of this city, was placed financially. There is no need to introduce Alfred Hill, the well-known musician and composer, whose appointment as conductor of the much-boomed N.S.W. Orchestra was recently announced. Alfred is one of the well-known family of tho Hatter Hills, of Lambton Quay and Island Bay — all well-known m musical and business circles. The publicity Mrs Alfred Hill's plight has •brought about is not pleasant for anyone concerned, but she appears to have exhausted EVERY OTHER MEANS of securing relief. Mrs Alfred -has been earning her living as a teacher of music, but ill- health is > depriving her of that source of revenue. Those who know her best vouch for her high respectability. Mrs Hill's case has come before Parliament m the shape of a petition presented by Mr R. A. Wright, M.P., and signed by 203 citizqns, including the Anglican Bishop of\ Wellington, Mr C. P. Skerrett, K.C., Mr G. Mitchell, M.P., and others. ,The petition set forth that, m October, 1920, Sarah Brownhill Hill was at Sydney, „ New South Wales, 'divorced from her husband, Alfred Hill, "of Sydney, music composer, on the grounds of legal desertion, arid that no alimony dlfras granted her by the i\'ew South Wales Court, Vith the result that she was NOW DESTITUTE. > . . . She had always been a highly respectable citizen, had worked strenuV busly m church matters, helped continuously m patriotic matters, and generally had been a person of the highest honor and integrity, added the petition; and it alleged that the circumstances m the divorce case were not carefully looked into by, or were not fully disclosed to, the New South .Wales ©ourt; and that consequently the Court's decision not to grant alimony was contrary to justice and equity. The v parties were married m Sydney m October, 1597. They .returned to .Wellington m 1303. Three children were born to them. ..In. 1909, after an illness m Wellington, her husband refused to stay m this country, and left for Sydney, leaving Her without any .provision and with ;£3OO of debt to face. From that time onwards she earned, enough to keep the children by teaching music. It was arranged, that she and the children should make their permanent home at Island Bay, and that Alfred Hill should come home every Christy mas. As, however, he had a London contract pending, he did not return. From 1909 to 1917 (both inclusive) Mrs Hill received f;cm her husband £567,. or an average of '. • . , £47 A TEAK, • In- 1919 divorce proceedings were commenced against . her.' A divorce was obtained on the ground that she had deserted her husband and had refused to go. to Sydney to live with him. The turning point m the case was that m 1914, her husband visited New Zealand, she was not m Wellington to meet him. The < Courts construed this fact 1 as showing an unwillingness to go back .to .him. At the tune of this visit she was detained in* Levin, (nursing her jick son. The doctors advised her s, that she was to keep the boy m a cold climate for two years. Upon her divorce she was allowed no alimony. Alfred Hill lemarried, and, m Mrs Hill's opinion, he had the RE-MARRIAGE IN VIEW before the divorce proceedings. She went to Sydney to see if she could have the divorce upset on this ground, but she was seized with enteric fever, and was ill for six months. Mrs. Hill claimed the house and t land, No. 12, Melrose Street, ' Island Bay, belonging to Mr. Alfred Hill, m respect of which she had made various payments, and m regard to which she stated that', m December, 1919, negotiations were entered into for its being settled" upon her and her children. An agreement to that effect was drawn up by her solicitor, but when her husband's Sydney solicitors perused the document, it was stated that no such arrangement could be entered into, as it would amount to collusion between the parties m the divorce suit. " While m Sydney she was served .. with a writ for possession of the propeaty at Island Bay. Being ill, and understanding that she could not. defend the action m the New Zealand Courts from Sydney, she CONSENTED TO JUDGMENT. In May, 1922, she returned to New Zealand and found that Alfred Hill would not allow her any maintenance or give her any interest m the property at Island Bay. "The petitioners, m view of the preceding facts (continues the document), are of opinion that as long as the said ; Alfred Hill has land or property m New Zealand, the said Sarah Brownhill Hill should not be allowed to be destitute, but should be given all such property absolutely. Your petitioners, therefore, humbly pray that your hon- ■■' ourable House will:— "(1) See that the New Zealand pro- • party and effects of -the said Alfred

Hill be transferred to the said- Sarah Brownhill Hill. "(2) That a compassionate allowance be made to the said Sarah Brownhill Hill. "(3) That negotiations be entered into with the Australian Government to prevent the repetition of such a case . as is (herein disclosed." It is a pity that the glare of publicity should have been rendered necesary m such a case. It is fortunate for Mrs. Hill that she has had good friends to help her m her distress.