SUPREME COURT.

Otago Witness, Issue 2660, 8 March 1905, Page 14

SUPREME COURT.

DIVOECE AND MATRIMONIAL CAUSES

Thuksdav, Februaby 16. (Eefore his Hoi.or i\lr Justice Williams.) DOWDALL V. DOV'DALL.

! Husband's peution ior dissolution of marri- ! rge, on the ground of desertion. j jiir F. J. Stilling appealed tor the petitioner, IViiJiani .Dowdali, 01 .Berwick, sJieep-iarmei. 1 Thera was ijo appsaiance of the ltspoiident, ! Ellea Dowculi (iormerly Flynn). | Mr S tiJmg srid that the parties were ; mairied at .fort Chalmers m 1898. The re- i spondeut was tornierly a tactory operative, 'lac newiy-married couple went north i'or a week, dur-ns which time the bride kept recur- \ ring to tli9 fact that the bride ji coin ought to change the prosaic life ot sneep-farnier for that of an ho c. keeper. they csme back to Dtinedin they went to the petitioner's home at Berwick, but direcliy tke wife got there she refused to stop, on the ground tiiat she did not like the place — in fact, she left the next morning. D'he petitioner and his brother both tried hard to induce her to st&p, but without effect. She was accompatsied on this occasion by her sister. About a week after she had left the petitioner got a letter ! from her asking that her boxes should be ssnt. The petitioner sent the boxes, ami wrote to her saying that as she hrd gone away against his wishes h» would not give her any more monej;. This brought her hack to Berwick, when she was accompanied by t&e petitioner's sister. The marriage had taken place •' from tha house of the petitionsr's sister, ' and it might te presuTued the sister was naiurally anxious to see a more happy resu'.t from the marriage of a few weeks before. The wife, however, was quite obrlurate, and after a few devs she left. In tue hope of getting her to change her m'nd. the petit'on<»r went to Port; Chalnierp, but she poiut-blank reTu3ed to go b.\ek. His Honor: Where is she now? Mr /Stilling said she seemed to ba moving • about. She was in Tnnsru onoe, &nd she was in Dunedin when she was served. Fiom inquiries st differeat times it would appear that the vespendont was quite earnest m her request that they should go in for »n hrtel, as dunng almost the w&o'e t-ime «ihe hac"i b?en ' awpy — some sev r en yenrs — sb.2 bid b?en earning j her living as a barmaid at different hotels in ' Citissclin, Oamaru. and Timaiii. Ev depce was given bj T the petitioner and "Robert Eain (-private detective). In answer to his Hocor. the Registrar stit.ed that tio appearance of ihe respondent had be°n entered. Dccres n'°i granted, to b?ccm° absolute after three months. CRIMINAL SITTINGS. FePRI-'.RY 20. j (Before his Honor Mr Justice WiUiams.) > CEAHOE OP WOUNDING WITH INTIOTT. William Huteliineon wa<= charged with, on or about December 5, at^ Cromwell, wonnding with intent to do grievous bodily harm, John r J.'hon3a<* Df»nni«. Mr C. C. Hutton (of C'ytle) "appeared for the ac?H=cd, whose plea was " Xot guilty." The Crown Prosecutor said that in order to find the prisoner guilty on the first count the iury would have to ha satisfied that accused intended to wound the proseeuto'r. On the second and third counts accused was cbirored with assault stich as to enuf-e ae'ual bodily harm and with commou assault. The prosecutor (Danms) was at tha present time laid nn v/ith typhoid fever in the Ciomw&ll Hospital, and his evidenca taken in the lower rcurt woulc 1 be read lo the jury. He and the accused wer; companions, and knot kod abjiit together. On the day in q«eslion they weie together on the racecourse. A good deal of drinking appeared to have bsen going on. and without clcmbi both pusoner ai.d prcseciitor bad been drinking. Som.t okl ovarrel came to light between rhen'., ?avsT3lirg Irouble of a lew dpys tsi-pvcit= y. in which tho rro^e, utor <=aid he liad be^n taken down. The quarrel seemed to have- b?en =om&what pudden. The men et'uck each o f liei". and the pvidence wculd show that thp accused debberaisly opened his k iif« ar.d struok at the prosecutor.* The kiiie was not a very la:ge one. but a smaller one cc-u'd easily cause death. Tfce-je cculd be no suggestion that accused had the knife in his hand at the time of the quarrel ar.d was cutr'ng iob.ieeo or doing some such thin 5. 'ov he was seen to take tha knife cut ox his pocket ard strike with it. l3ennJ« sn^tsi-ipd .-eriou-3 v. ounds which recossi-'ptrcl his b->'."~ in the Cromwell Hospital a week c- 10 dnys and showed that the kriTa was vsivl t'Ai^e. pnd v.-iih cor.s:derrble i-ioie':ce. V/herx an?=tcrl aecu:scl said he d.O rot clo it. thcrjh he riwl -^ct derv having q-i!iire''ed v.-ith the Ihe krwfe \vas found t :i .""ccuset I -? per'- on (iecge Alexmdfr Morr,s, medical pr.ict:tionor jt Crcir*'el'. depnred that ha c °^v i ':^ 3--o=e • i'ov I>eimis iTJiii-tdiately s>ftc* ha was vci :d"cl. He 'itc! two panctuicJ vcivid'^ope f •'. fie o\> atd? ci the thigh r- id thy n'her on -he buttock Thc=:e wcuacU about l l in .n detail. Th» wcu~ds cruld harp b-en cv^d by thp K-nfo tdiccY -pd Den, s ni? i^iiicecl to 'he V-ppral. a.d di=ihargcO iv !> woe': 01 10 (T^ys Co «u"ici"b'e \.o'.-r.^e w.M.'d Lo ire,;',, tl tn 11 P. ct the v cv. (1 m t s o In ■,;',- T) •„ , v ,- a ; ji qllq ll r, 1_„ C oinv\<=>; ITI yiT 1 u.'nr» r iom etlrnf C „_-- 0 ;.■ ■ 7 It -wcuid not !■' pes-ib'o 'or i wt . d o that na^iue in th' bin cck + o S'i'C.is'y '^ii'c n iupn v res' th-ie vf.e .on- 'c 1' t, - {'en '5 ■" aq r,b c tn walk ab-iu 1 v '"'ox T 1 • i;.- co.iir-1 1 * I'>n1 '> n venrd m gh ( ')'•{? k>~ j n n r .d'rt-i'lv icf' cmi h\ o, 1 ? in \o 1 1 £r TI „, „ !V, 0 , tun l'h • .'-no" i J^-'in 'liiiu.i* Do.'i'", ai r> ("■ 1 \a, «i v°- Iho 1 ifatl 'I ho evidence J o-.vp(] '■'•• -f f. -■•• 'uiir' "a f. 3 w v.ord=" at >&■ l.v. ai. >; L-c.li r..i..is and Ilnhi Imisju

came to blows. Witness did not remsmber who struc-k fir=t He felt a sting lr the side, and heaid someone in the crowd say, '" He has got a knife " Witness knew that he was s-tabb?d. Vitness had a knife, but did not handle it at all. He was slightly intoxicated, nrd did not see accused thrust the knife at him. They were at close quarter^, and it was

possiL^e he (witness) might havo got in the way ot the kmfe. I 'ihonias Hichsrdson, blacksmith, at Low-

s?id he witnessed

the row betweeu

, Dpniiis and Hutchinson ai the racecouise. 1 TJie former accused the latter of ta.king him down with loaded dice. They struck one j another. Before a V.ow was struck a-ecused took a knife out of his pocket and opened it. j When they came to blows Hutchinson fell and gripped Dennis round the middle. He ' saw Hutrhinson strike A. blow with the hand ! which had held the kn«9. Cross-examined- : De-nnis struck Hutchinson

so that he fell on his knees and gripped him

about the middle. Hutchinson was drunk. He saw Hutchinson strike but the one blow. ■William Campbell (butcher, a.t Lowburn), John Richaidson (hairdresser, ai Cromwell), and Police-sergeant Eogers also gave evidence

for tho uropecution.

The last-named witness

said that both men were under the influence of liquor — Hurtchinson. being the worse — but ■ucre not very bad. Hutchinson had arrived m

the colony from Australia ssven weeks prior io his ariest.

Mi- Hvtton pointed out that the circumstances giving rise to the charge in quc-stion. were eayab'e of very cliff eieirtf constructions. On the most serious count ths prisoiier. if convicted, was liable to imprisonment for hC^. He proposed to show that if HutohinEon did assault Dennis it was an assault of the most trivial KPtu". c, and one incapable of being viewed in the Fencus light in which it hsd hef>n preseuted so far. He proposed to shew that acctised did not assault Dennis at all, but that Dennis in the first instance- assaulted: him without prc vocation of any kind, and acxustd in his drunken condition, caught lio'.d of the other mei&ly to protect himself and feave his face. Accused had a knife in his hand, but he could not, in his condition, bs awsire of what he was doing, and if an injury was inflicted it was unintentional. Further, aocu=ed, he eubrnitted, did not commit the miuiy, but Dennis himself, through punching Ihe other man while he was down. Hutchmson was clawed by a severe b!ow, and couia ret possibly have committed the injury, i'or which* the punching and pushing of Dennis was iesponsib'e. Further, it mxist be considered that no serious consequences resulted.

Evidence for the defence wa3 given by Charles ilanson (labourer, at Kawaraw Station) and Hobert James Jones (rabbitex at the isame station).

Acctiscd, sworn, said it was not true that 'he had taken Denis down at gambling Hs had cv the contrary lost money. Se remembered nothing wnatsver about ihe quarrel at Cromwell racecourse. He rememrbered nothing" after the second race that day, and did not kno-ar next dary what he was charged with uatil h» came inta the court.

Counsel having addressed the jury, his He nor summed up, and the jury retired at 4.50, and after a retirement of nearly hslf an hour brought in. a verdict of " Guilty " en the third count — namely, that charging tho prisoner with common assault.

Accuced gave his age as 29 years.

The ivrobation oiScer's report showed that very little wr.s known about accused, he being % rri-ent arrival frcm Australia.

His Honor, in imposing sentence, said the prisoner would bs admiitad to probation for six months, and ordered to pay £10 ■"•owa.'-da i>he co=t of the prosecution by iastalments oi 103 a week.