SUPREME COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 15382, 20 February 1912, Page 7

SUPREME COURT.

IN DIVORCE. Monday, Fi;nnti.Mtv IS). (More his Honor Mr Justice- Williams,) KIIJII V. KIIIB 'Jliiß wtis a o.vc in which Mary Mnson Kidd tiucd for a duisolutioii of her marriiigo wiHi Tliotnaa Allan Kidd, formerly of WaiUhuna. and now of Stratford, tarter, on .tlio kwiiikl of desertion.—Mr llmiion tipixsarod lor |»iiuoiici". and respondent dnl not iippwir.—The evidence thawed- that the parties weio married on Ooteber 'JO, WA, jit WaitaJmna, and had lived together st WaitJuiuna, Tajxmui, ltoxburgii, Maungarwi, and New Plymouth; tlmt there were no children; and that on or about Febraaiy, 1306, the rctjKmdont finally deserted ltfi wife—ln tho coutMs of licr evidt'lif." jiotitioner further stated that shortly licr nvirriage hur husband took to drink and treated her cruelly, lie tuviT.il times went away and Mint nothing for her sii|i»rt. Whilst at New Plymouth ha chased iior with on axo and trjed to iw down u well and threatciud her with acarving knife. His conduct. Ikuiiiio to b;"' that silo found heiscll unalilc I" liyti with lain, and alio luul to leave him in February, 1906.—Jcssio .Moylo gave evideiico on Uio aaino lines.—His Honor uroulcd n decrco nisi, to become jilmoliiio nfux three months J cosUi v>n mc lowest s>.ale. JOLLY V. JDI.I.Y. This was a case in winch Mary Hannah Jolly applied for u dif-solulion of her inurria'go witli ltobert Jolly, ot Uunwlin, Libouror, on the grounds of misconduct.— Mx Ikuilou iipiieared in supjiort of the petition.—The petitioner wlatcd that the iiiarriago took lilaco on .September 29, 1199, at Dunedin, and six children liud been bom, live of wlkmii vi« now alive. Whilst they wero living at Wliaro Flat (hero woro quiiiTols becnuM> of Jolly paying attentions to petitionor's sistw, now dead. In January of 1911 witnejii happened on proof of licr suspicions, and her husband udmittiHl his wrong-doing,—Frances Maud Fiujiatrick. Wuliam John Harvard, and James MOlor'folork of tho Magiiitrate's Court, Dunedin), gave oorroboraUvo evidence,—His Honor groiited a decree ni3i, to boivino absolute in three Jiiontlui, with costs on the lowest scale mxcwin v. sixCLAtn. This wan the |Kilition of Mary Sinclair for tho dissolution ol her Jiariiago with ■Jainc-6 .Sinclair, cabinetmaker, formerly of lnvercargill, and now of Dunedin.—Tho incts, as outlined by Mr llnnlon, who appeared for tho i>outiouur, were that tho parties wero married at Invcroargill on Aiigiiel 17, 18M. Tlireo cliihiaii wore bom, but idl died, tho doctor attributing this lo tho inotiier's worry. Six or i«ven months after tlio marriage rcq»nd6nt started dtiitking, ' and neglected iiis work, and petitioner J:«d to sell tho liuiuo to try to pay tlio debts, but tho husband took the money and Jut tlio debts stand. Ho treated hn vilo cruelly, and often struck her They como to Dunedin, but respondent could not remain in employment on.account of his drinking habile. Ho oiu'o tried t/i choku liis wile, and on another occasion he threw her into tho .street when she mol him a,t tho door at night, and she was forced to spend tlio night iu her nightdress in tho coalliouM;. It would l» six years next inonth since slw left him, and he had given hor no support during that period.—Evidence wafl given by tlio pciitionor and Ccorgo Haines.—His Honor grained a decree lu'si, lo become absolute uftc-r three mouths, with costs on (Jio lowest stale. KIMI V. KINO, 'lliis vi;\» a petition by Margaret King for tho dinscJtition <if her marriage witli Kretlorick Henry King, on Iho grmnd of desortion.—Mr Irwin outlined the f;u:ts of tho case, and Uien calM petitioner, who vaid that sho win married at Lumsden on January 6, 1697. They lived f.hcro for light yuus, at llydo sov«n uioutlis, and.at Omakau 13 months. Her married lifo had lieen unhappy us Imt husband used to knock l:or about. Ho was given (<> drink, but Mover lost work through it. About three weeks after tho lint child was born rcs|iondent kicked her. Ho used to go a week at a tijpo and nover si,Kjak, and lio was never kiml lo her. Throo days prior lo tho birth of Uio third cliild sho had words with respondent, wiio kicked her. When tjiev wero living at Hydo he hit licr with a broom, giving her a bkvck eye. 'J'wo days lator thoy went to Omakau whero respondent contintiwl to treat her iu tho huiio manner. It was nothing lo got a cup of tea over her face, anil omx'* ho threw a rookwl thick, dish ami nil, at hor. Due morning when ho was going to work her husband (old her that if klio Ikkl not gono by the timo ho came homo iio would cut licr throat. Sho iwcked up, and taking tho littlo girl with her went to her sister's pLioo in Dunedin. Two day* later respondent caino l.i town Jiimnolf and forcibly took tho child away, but hn did not ask tlio witness lo go homo. Witness had been three years in eorvico at Christohtircii, and had now n smallgoods shop During tho Gvo y«irs alio had been away she had sent tlio ohildrcn theJr clotliee, and liad Kono once a year to bw Uio children. She had received no money from respondent finco she had left hiia-Catlicrino Dratly, Mary Hooves, nnd Daniel Borry also gavecvidoncc.—His Honor granleil a decree nisi, lo Ixoomo nlisolute alter threo months; •UdU on tho lowest toilo.