SUPREME COURT.
DIVORCE
Before his Honor Mr. Justice Chapman. The Supreme Court sitting was continued this afternoon, and heard the divorce case — Charles Phillip White (Mr Bright), petitioner, \ r . Olive Mabel White, respondent, and Victor Rupert Anderson, co-respondent. Petitioner said he was a laborer residing at Ormond. He was married m May 27, 1907. After the marriage he lived with his wife at Ormond. There were three children of the marriage, all of whom were m his custody. He lived with his wife until March, 1916. when ho left for the military camp. He was m Gisborne on final leave m June, 1916, and lived with his wife at Mangapapa. Prior to going into camp he gave her £50, paid the house rent for six months, and allotted her 3s. per day while m camp and 4s. per day after. While away he wrote to her and received letters at intervals. He (petitioner) returned here on April 15th last, and found that his wife was not living m the home provided for her. His mother showed [ him newspaper reports '■ concerning his wife when he returned. Witness accused her of infidelity. She replied that "she did not care what he did as long as she got a decent co-respondent." She threw, the wedding ring at him, and said she did not want to see him or the children again. Detective McLeod said he knew the parties concerned. Co-respondent was the person before the Court yesterday on a criminal charge. He was a criminal. On 9th Octobef last he was arrested! on a charge of vagrancy. He was associated with respondent. On 11th October witness said to Anderson, "You are a dirty blackguard, living, with a soldier's wife while he is fighting for his country." Anderson replied, "Wh.it lias it got to do with you? I, can have any woman I like." Witness told him that Anderson and Costello encouraged respondent and her mate to go to their camp at Paparatu. Anderson replied : "What has that got to do with you?" Witness warned respondent, and said that unless she discontinued the children would have to be taken from her custody. Witness considered respondent lived a bad life. But for the fact that the husband was at the front the children would have been/ taken out of her custody. His Honor granted a decree, nisi; to be made absolute after three months, the custody of the children, to be m the 'hands of petitioner.
A civil case regarding native land was proceeded with, the charges against Joseph Crook being allowed to stand over until to-morrow.
SUPREME COURT.
Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XLVI, Issue 15017, 18 September 1919, Page 6
The Gisborne Herald Company is the copyright owner for the Poverty Bay Herald. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of the Gisborne Herald Company. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in