ACTION IN DIVORCE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20418, 26 May 1928, Page 2

ACTION IN DIVORCE.

FORMER CABINET MINISTER.. F. M. B. FISHER’S MARRIAGE. WIFE GRANTED DECREE NISI. (Special to Daily Times.) CHRISTCHURCH, May 25. Francis Marion Bates Fisher, a former New Zealand Cabinet Minister, petitioned for divorce from his wife, Esther Alice Fisher, in tho Supreme Court at Christchurch to-day. A mutual agreement to separate was the grounds of the petition, j Mrs Fisher cross-petitioned on the same j grounds. The husband did not jiroceed , on his petition, and his counsel offered no objection to the grounds of the crosspetition or the question of domicile and agreement to separate, Mr F. S. Wilding appeared for Fisher, and Mr A. T. Donnelly for Mrs Fisher. Mr Donnelly said the pbsition was that Mrs Fisher was always unwilling to allow Fisher to divorce her; but eventually she decided to take proceedings herself. There were two questions that arose. The first was as to the domicile of the parties, and the second was whether the separation wag proved. Fisher who without any definite occupation or profession. He went mto politics at an early age, and was in politics for a number of years. At one time he , was the youngest Cabinet Minister in Parliament. When he was defeated ho was left without any occupation. He went to England and worked in different capacities, and apparently did good worn, for the correspondence showed that tho authorities at Home thought a great deal of what he had done. Later, through the good offices of the people he met in the war time, he got a job which he still held. His present position was that be was a financial adventurer —not using the word in any offensive sense; but he was a man who was willing to go anywhere where there was a fair field fbr his talents. Referring to the evidence which was taken in England Mr Donnely said that Fisher was married in 1899 in New Zealand, and he always regarded New Zealand as his home. He would return to New Zealand as soon as he was 1 in a financial position to do so. Apparently ho held a small section of land in Wellington. Dealing with the question of domicile, Mr Donnelly submitted that for the purpose of the action it must be held that the domicile of origin lin survived. As to the questina of ser-ir tion, Fisher went awav in 1915 to Eirr land. Then he proposed to Mrs Fisher that they should not live together again. When Mrs .Fisher proposed to go to Eng. land he put it to her that if she came they should agree to separate. There were long discussions as to the amount he was to give her. Counsel quoted a letter from Fisher which was in part as follows; —“ On your arrival here I shall meet you. We shall be the very best of friends, but we will not resume our married life.” Mrs Fisher wcVit Home in 1970 and lived in London, and she had been maintained, by Fisher until the present time. The parties had not lived together from 1915, and since 1920 they were separated. The wife wrote agreeing to a separation. - He was to allow her £4OO a year, in addition to her private means, and she agreed not to intrude on his private life. Mr Wilding said that Fisher did not desire to ask for an order on the original decree. The position was as was stated bv Mr Donnelly. His Honor said that he had no doubt on the matter. • Tie agreement to separate wss^ proved to hi* satisfaction becauia it was . in the handwriting of Fisher and signed by Mrs Fisher. That memo randum made it clear that on May 22, 1920., if not earlier, \tlio parties agreed to separate, the husband undertaking to pay hig wife a substantial annuity. On tfie question of domicile he held that Fisher had retained his domicile of origin where he was domiciled in fart and in law, and until the matrimonial bond was entirely dissolved a wife found her domicile in the country in which the husband was domiciled. A decree ni»> was granted to. ho made absolute after three months. The costa of the wife would be allowed against the husband on tho highest scale. The costs of the com. mission and the taking of evidenci in London, failing an agreement between the parties within (our months, would bo fixed by the registrar. For a good many yeans Mr **isher has been a more or less spectacular figure, his achievements ranging from political activities to prowess on the fields o! sport. Born in 1877 he entered politics at a comparatively early age, representing Wellington City in the House of Representatives from 1905 to 1914. During the. last three years of his parliamentary career he held the portfolio of Minister of Trade and Custom*, in which capacity he negotiated a reciprocal trade treaty with Australia. He served in the South .African war with tbe rank of captain, being awarded a medaj and clasp for his services. He has represented Canterbury nt football and, athletics, hut his chief distinctions in the realm of s"ort have b-'rn won at lawn tennis. He is a familiar figure at tournaments in Britain ! and on the Continent, and has won a great number of championships, while in I 1924 he renresented New Zealand in 1 the Davi.s Cup competition.