A DIVORCE CASE.

Otago Witness, Issue 2258, 10 June 1897, Page 30

A DIVORCE CASE.

Wellinston, June 3. In the Divorce Court Joseph Soler, wine merchant, of 'Wanganui, Bued for a divorce from his wife Mary on the ground of adultery with John Tucker, licensee of the Prince of i Wales Hotel at Masberton. The parties were I Feparated in 1893. There were six children. ! Mrs Soler' petitioned for judicial separation in 1892 on the grounds of adultery and cruelty, and a decree was gi anted. Soler agreed to pay his wife £1 per week and ono-third of the profits of his business over £250 per annum. He also agreed to take a housekeeper approved by his wife. Soler deposed thai he had cmi ployed a man named Dale to get evidence in | support of the divorce, and had offered £25 and | £75 to a cook and waiter at the hotel in MasSerton ! if they could prove iv caurt that Mrs Soler had done wrong. They, however, showed the letter to Mrs Boler. He afterwards employed Bas^etb, a. private detective, of" Wellington, who offered for £100 to get sufficient evidence. If he failed he was to get nothing. Petitioner denied telling a witness he had scan a letter to the effect that his wife had gone to a woman at M'.sterbon to perform an operation. W. G. , Bassefct gave evidence as to watching the hotel and seeing Mrs Soler enter Tucker's bedroom at 1 a.m. Bassetb is the man who was pub on his trial for being concerned in Detective Kirby's 63caps, and some amusemenb was caused by Mr Jellicoe remarking to him, " I believe you have been concerned with other kinds or cases — packiog cases for instance." Witness retorted : " I believe you advised a man to clear, and I assisted him." j June 4. I In the Soler divorce case, this morning was taken- up with the examination of William Long, who said he was born in the colony and was educated in a State school. He described watching Tucker's room wibh BasEett and seeing someone enter it, bub ho conld not say who. Bassott gave him 30s a week and expenses. ! Witness was cross-Bxaiained at length by Mr Jellicoe. The evidence this afternoon was confined to thab of the female and male servants who had been in the employ of the co-respon-dent Tucker at his hotel (the Prince of Wales, ! Masterton), where Mrs Soler was engaged as housekeeper. Theic tfcs'imoDy was chiefly in the direction that Mrs Soler's conduct in the hotel appeared to be more than that of a servant. One female servant deposed that on one occasion she saw respondent and corespondenb under circumstances which produced to her mind the idea of usdue familiarity. Some of the witnesses deposed that Mrs Soler was in the habit of entering Tucker's room while he was dressing, without knocking ; but ab the same time they admitted they saw no familiarity. . June 5. In the Soier divorce case most of the morning was taken up with the examination of Miss Quinn, a barmaid at the co-respondent's hotel, who deposed to the familiar terms on which Mrs Soler and Tucker were. The former in every resspecb aoted more as wife than housekeeper. Two of the petitioner's children were also called. June 7. In the Divorce Court in the case of Soler v. Soler and Tucker, Dr Hosking gave evidence as to attending Mrs Soler for an internal complaint, and also thab Tucker, who waa very ill with disease of the kidneys, at one of the periods named in the case for the petitioner was physically incapable of commibtiog adultery. Caleb Smith, a tenant of the petitioner's, said that Mrs Soler had told him she had written a letter to Soler admitting adultery, but said she had only done it to annoy her husband. Mrs Soler, in her evidence, said she wrote two letters to this effect, as she waa annoyed ab being slandered and watched. She denied point blank ever haying committed adultery with the co-respon-dent. She stigmatised tho statements of the servants as lies, and declared that she never went to Tucker's room or to the bathroom

when he was in it, except when he was ill and she was nursing him, or when he wanted thn keys. Tucker also denied improper relations with Mrs Soler. June 8. Tucker, the co-respondent of the Soler divorce case, was under examination this morning. He gave a general denial to the allegations of misconduct with the respondent, and declared thab at certain dates mentioned on behalf of the petitioner he was in Wellington. Mrs Soler, he said, had never been in his bedroom while he was there, and on only one occasion had he gone' to hers, and then for a moment only, and he knocked before entering ib. The whole of the vesfe of the day was t*ken up with tbe addresses of counsel and the judge's summing up. The jury reburned a verdicb for the husband (the petitioner), and a decree nisi was granted, with costs against Tucker, the co-respondent.