DIVORCE PROCEEDINGS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18867, 21 May 1923, Page 11

DIVORCE PROCEEDINGS

PETITION AND COUNTER-PETITION His Honor Mr Justice Sim sat at the Supreme Court oh Saturday .morning and beard a petition for dissolution of marriage, the petitioner being James Nicol arid the respondent Margaret Nicol, and the ground of the petition desertion. Mr W. G. Hay appeared for petitioner, and Mr F. B. Adams for respondent. Mr Adams informed his Honor that petitioner alleged desertion, and respondent had filed a counter-petition also alleging desertion:- There .was no question but that respondent Had left"' her husband. The question that arose was whether she had left voluntarily, or because her condition was unbearable, and petitioner had deserted her. -.Mr- Hay and ho had corroborative evidence, and had had no doubt either of them could obtain a decree nisi, but they had come to an understanding that petitioner should obtain it, and respondent would therefore withdraw her defence. He thought it only right to inform the court that inoney was passing between the parties. Petitioner had agreed to pay costs, and_ a small sum had been paid by way of alimony. ' Mr Hay said petitioner had agreed to pay £IOO in full settlement of alimony. The narties had been married at Clinton in 1907. Petitioner was a farmer, and they lived 'at Waiwera South. There was no family. In a few years respondent began to get dissatisfied, and said she was going B way to the North Island, where she would have more freedom. Her husband did not regard the matter seriously, until the afternoon she put on her hat and said “Goodbye.” He 'thought she was going to Waiwera Township, but she never came back. He got an inquiry agent to try to trace her, but with no result. Later ho was informed by a friend that she had . been seen at the Auckland Exhibition. He had never seen her since she had left him, but she had written twice, once for money, which ho did not send, and a second time asking him to obtain a divorce. Petitioner stated in evidence that his wife had told him that the place was dull, and that she was going away to the North Island.' , She left him on December 19, 1913. She gave them dinner as usual, washed up, put on her hat, and said, “Ta, ta, alll” He thought she was going to the township, but she never returned. He acknowledged an unsigned letter to be in his handwriting. It was a reply to his wife saying she should have applied for a divorce as she was a young woman yet and might settle down happily in life. He denied ever having been unkind to his wife.

Agnes Nicol and John Nicol also gave evidence.

A decree nisi was granted, with leave to make in absolute after three months.