HUSBANDS AND WIVES

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 984, 29 May 1930, Page 12

HUSBANDS AND WIVES

Domestic Troubles in Court MANY UNDEFENDED DIVORCES 7WJARITAL tragedies and domestic dissensions were related 111 by the score to Mr. Justice Herclman and Mr. Justice Smith in the Supreme Court this morning, when judgment of the exceptionally heavy divorce list in the May sessions was begun. In two courts, relatives and friends of petitioners, and counsel formed busy assemblages. The divorce day list for this sitting is one of the most formidable known in Auckland.

The marital companionship of I Leslie Wallis White (Mr. Adams) and j his wife, lasted one week after the I ceremony, according to his evidence j in support of his petition for dissolu- j tion of his marriage with Helen Florence White, on the ground of desertion. Petitioner said he went Home ; in 1916 to join the Royal Air Force. 1 in December, 1919. he was married in Berkshire, and a week later he < hud to leave for the Dominion. lie arranged with his wife to follow him j to New Zealand, but she did not do ' so, despite the fact that he wrote to : her appealing to her to join him. In ; August, 1920, he sent her £4O for her j passage money, but she did not leave j England, neither did she return the i money. A decree nisi was granted. WITHOUT CONSENT While he was serving in the Royal Navy in July, 1920, his wife, Janet ! McD. Wilson, left home without his c onsent, stated Isaac Wilson (Mr. A. | Moody), whose petition was based on I desertion. The petitioner said he ! was married in November, 191 S, in j Scotland, and his wife departed from j home two years later. Seven years [ ago, when leaving Home to settle in | New Zealand, he asked his wife to j accompany him, but she refused. A decree nisi was granted. "ALWAYS DRUNK” ‘Tie was always drunk, and was .- upported by his wife rather than that he kept her,” said a brother of Maude hi Ivininmouth (Mr. Mackay), who : ought dissolution of her marriage with William David Kininmouth, on grounds of habitual drunkenness and failure to maintain. The evidence of the petitioner, who is living in NewSouth Wales, was tendered to the court in documentary form. The brother of the petitioner said that after the war he had lived with the respondent at Khandallah, and had plenty of chances of judging the latter's habits. Mrs. Kininmouth had to leave her husband in Christchurch in 1923, because of his drinking. and she then went nursing to support herself. She returned to him later, but she was again forced to leave him in 1926, and she jwas given sufficient money by a friend to go to Australia. A decree nisi was granted. "HAVING A GOOD TIME” “She blamed me for bringing her j away from Scotland, where she was i having a good time,” said James Gray j Meek (Mr. Goulding), in explanation j of the departure of Jessie Roberts ! Meek, from whom he sought a divorce ! on the grounds of desertion. Peti- i Hotter said he was married in Dun- j ■lee in 1919, and he and his wife came ! io New Zealand and lived in Auck- j land and Lower Hutt. She left him j in 1921 and returned to Scotland. A decree nisi was granted. DESIRE TO SEE WORLD A desire to see the world led Ruby j Matilda Lilley to leave home, accord- ! :ing to Norman Francis Lilley (Mr. j Jordan) who petitioned for restitu- j tion of conjugal rights. The petitioner said he was married in December, 1.922, at Auckland, and his wife left home in June, 1929, and she was now in Australia. An order requiring the wife to return to her husband in 30 days was made. “ANOTHER MAN” Belief that another man was responsible for his wife’s leaving home, though he had not any definite proof, was expressed by James Alexander Boswell (Mr. Hogben) In support of his petition for dissolution of his marriage from Caroline Boswell, on the ground of desertion. Petitioner said he was married in Julj'. 1895, there being three children of the union. His wife left home on November. 1908, without indicating any reason. He followed her to Christchurch and urged her to return bat without success. A decree nisi was granted. “After my marriage, my husband treated me cruelly and drank heavily,” Grace Frances I. Murray (Mr. Matthews) said in her petition against William David Murray, owing to the existence of a separation order. “J was married in September, 1920, and lived with my husband at Otahuhu. After I gained the separation order, I did not live with my husband.” Petitioner’s mother said her daughter had not lived with-Murray since the order, and a decree nisi, to be moved absolute after three months, was granted, petitioner to have custody of the child. "NOT WANTED” “in 1925, I came to Auckland on a \ holiday and received this telegramj from my husband: ‘Stop where you i are, no need to come home, not; wanted,’ ” said Elizabeth Caroline Me-1 Gregor (Mr. Singer), who was] granted, on proof of desertion, a de- j ores nisi, to be moved absolute after j three months, from Kenneth Me-! Gregor. Petitioner said she was mar-! ried in 1920 and lived at Hamilton, j There was one child. When she re- j eeived the wire, she returned and there was a scene with her husband. Fie went away and took the child, but returned It later. Petitioner obtained work elsewhere and had supported herself and her child since then. She would have claimed maintenance from her husband had she been able to find him. A decree nisi was granted a salesmanager, Montague Steele (Mr. North- j croft) against Grace I. Steele, on the j ground of mutual separation. The ! marriage took place in Keusington, : London, and there were two children. HABITUAL CRUELTY The habitual cruelty and drunkenness of Alfred John Sheay led to the granting of a decree to Olive Mavis Sheay (Mr. Singer). From the beginning of the marriage in 1924, her luisband made a practice of arriving home in a drunken state. This increased in frequency. “He used to threaten my life when

he was in liquor and I made a habit of hiding his razors,” the petitioner ■ s-aid. “More than once he said he ■ t»ould uo for me.’

Mrs. Sheay described one occasion when her husband came home drunk, struck her several times, threw her oil a bed and began to choke her. She knocked on the wall and the landlady came in. After that she left Sheay and proceedings were instituted. She was working as a tailoress. Sheay had only his wife and himself to keep, but he failed to do that. “I have seen Sheay drunk tw ; o or three times a. week,” the petitioner’s mother said. “From my observations I would say Sheay had been habitually drunk over a period of four years.” “My husband went to Wanganui to attend a conference in 1925 and I have not heard of him since,” said Myrtle E. M. Sowerby (Mr. Singer), who was granted a decree nisi against Richard St. V. Sowerby, on the ground of desertion. “We had lived at Hangatiki. “My husband was in charge of the funds of an organisation when he went to the conference, and I do know that he embezzled the sum.” Married in 1926, Katherina Cecilia Imelda Miller (Mr. Dickson) and Thomas Selwyn Miller (Mr. Blomfield) separated in the same year. Miller’s petition on the ground of mutual separation was not proceeded with and was dismissed. Mrs. Miller was allowed a decree, with custody of the child of the marriage, on a counterpetition. - TOGETHER FOUR MONTHS

After four months’ marriage, Blanche Paula Silver tired of the matrimonial bonds, according to Percy James Silver (Mr. Haynes), whose petition for dissolution of his marriage was based on desertion. Petitioner said he was married on October 6, 1914, and one day in January, 1915, he came home from work and found his wife had disappeared with her belongings. At her request by letter he later met his wife, who asked him whether she could obtain a divorce by consent. A decree nisi was granted. After he entered in a deed of separation from his wife in 1928, Frederick Patrick Jones was seen living with another woman in Ponsouby. This evidence was given by John Goddard, an inquiry agent, who supported •the petition of Lydia Frances Jones j (Mr, Moody) for dissolution of her i marriage on the gi’ound of her bus- j band’s adultery. The parties were j married in August, 1926, and later | : parted under a deed of separation. J Evidence was given by an inquiry agent that Jones had been living with another woman under the name of j “Mr. and Mrs. Jones” at a place in ! Ponsonby. * A decree nisi was granted. “MISERABLE LIFE” ! Mutual separation, habitual drunken- j ness and cruelty, failure to maintain, j • and desertion, were the grounds on j | which Ivy Florence Miller (Mr. Mat- j’ ; thews) sought divorce frV>m Francis ! ' William Miller. The petitioner told a story of con- j tinual trouble and cruelty since her j marriage to the respondent, when she j I was 17 years of age. Her husband had agreed, at her suggestion after she had had “a miser- i able time,” to separate. That was in September, 1926. Respondent then said petitioner had been a good wife and he was to blame. He had not troubled her since that time. During their j actual married life, Miller had caused her great 'worry through his drunkenness. “On one occasion 1 was on the Bench when Miller was charged with stealing a barrel of whisky.” said A M. Barribal, a Justice of the Peace, of Waiuku. A decree was made on the - ground of mutual separation. Decrees nisi were granted in the 1 following petitions, on the grounds of failure to comply with orders for restitution of conjugal rights:—Algar Frederick Francis Bath (Mr. Tuck) against Lila Williemina Bath; Bertie Cooper (Mr. M. Adams) against Arnelie Bertha Cooper; Dorothy O'Dwyer (Mr. Burt) against Charles O’Dwyer; Harry Warder (Mr. Anderson) against Alice Warder. Arising out of the conviction and sentence of Charles Moyart Spinlay for bigamy, Rena Norma Spinley (Mr. Ray) was granted a decree nisi on the ground of his adultery with the woman with whom he went through a second form of marriage. Decrees nisi on the grounds of desertion were granted in the following petitionsßosamond May Proude (Mr. Ritchie) against Joseph B. D. Proude; Easter Mary Collins (Mr. Steadman) against Walter H. Collins; Theresa May Rowe (Mr. Roe) against Mark Daniel Rowe; Mabel Gussy (Mr. Elliott) against Anthony Gussy; Ann | Green (Mr. McLiver) against George ! S. Green; Herbert E. R. Macdonald ' (Mr. Webb) against Luc.'y Macdonald; ! Doris Lilian Brown (Mr. Bone) against ; Euclid Vyse Brown. ; On the ground of her husband’s ‘ adultery. Josephine Miles (Mr. Blomi field) was granted a decree nisi j against Richard John Miles. Archibald A. Dickson (Mr. Cooney) | was granted a decree nisi against his 1 wife. Hild J. Dickson, on the ground ■ of adultery. Peter Vezich was cited as co-respondent. On the ground of separation decrees nisi were granted in the following petitions: Margaret Mary Hepworth (Mr. Fiddes) against Lionel j Sykes Hepworth; Clare Webster (Mr. j Osburne-Lilly) against Godfrey E. j Webster; Eileen Bessie Tennant (Mr. j Baxter) against George Tennant. “The first da}’ of the marriage my j | wife deceived me; instead of being j | only 56 she was 13 years older,” said i ; George Brown (Mr. King), who peti-; tioned for dissolution of Ills marriage j with Bridget E. Brown on the ground of desertion. “We never lived hap- j pily,” said the petitioner, who was j married in 1913. “She left me last j in September, 1926, when she arrived with a van and took the things j away without an explanation, though \ I was there. She said she might re- j turn, but did not do so.” A decree nisi was granted. Other decrees granted by Mr. Jus- j tice Smith were allowed to Annie Oli’.’o Dowie (Mr. Matthews) against Peter ! Dowie, on the ground of mutual separ- I ation; Ida Elizabeth Barker (Mr. i

Ilolmden) against Walter Barker, separation order; Rose Olive Cox (Mr. Singer) against Henry Cox. failure to comply with a deci’ee for the restitution of conjugal rights; Joseph Edwin Farrow (Mr. Matthews) against Alma May Farrow, mutual separation; Stanley M. Bowmar (Mr. Hall Skelton) against Leila Alice Bowmar, failure to comply with an order for the restitution of conjugal rights; William Hesketh (Mr. Hall Skelton) against Agnes Hesketh, failure to comply with a decree for the restitution of conjugal rights; Frederick Walter Breed (Mr. Sullivan) against Kathleen P. M. Breed, failure to comply with a decree for the restitution of conjugal rights; Mildred Mary Sunderland (Mr. Hall Skelton) against Spencer R. Sunderland, separation order; Georgiera Parton (Mr. Matthews) against William Parton, desertion; Sylvia Ella Couper (Mr. Matthews) against William J. A. Couper, mutual separation; Susanah Daisy Standen (Mr. Matthews) against Henry Standen, separation order. “TOOK REVOLVER TO ME” “On one occasion, my husband took a revolver tq me.” Telling a story of 111-treatment from her husband, Benjamin K. Deeley, Doris Madge E. Deeley (Mr. Sullivan) was granted a decree nisi, to be moved absolute in three months. The petition was on the grounds of habitual drunkenness and cruelty, and Mrs. Deeley’s story was supported by a step-daughter of the petitioner. In answer to Mr. Sullivan, petitioner said she was married in 1920. Her husband’s drinking was the cause of trouble, and Deeley had been sent for four or five months to Roto Roa Island. He had often been before the court for drunkenness and, petitioner said, had been three times charged with intoxication while in charge of a car. He had been before the court for drunkenness since the proceedings were instituted. “My husband struck me many times,” the petitioner said. “I-lis conduct has compelled me and the children to sleep all night in the car. When drunk he is fighting mad, and he always makes allegations against my character. I was 29, and he 49, when we were married in 1920.” Petitioner was given custody of the children.

A decree for restitution of conjugal rights was granted George Edward Knock (Mr. Sullivan) against Mabel M. C. Knock. “I think she is interested elsewhere,” the' petitioner said. Petitions for restitution of conjugal rights were granted in the following cases; Cedric Morrow Taylor against Nelle Taylor; Theodore Walter McGill (Mr. Kalman) against Edith Margaret McGill. Francis Henry Bathie (Mr. Fraer), against Masie Francis Bathie; Beryl Edna Daly (Mr. Haynes), against Frank Edward Daly. A month after her marriage Mena Margaret Harris, married in January, 1923, insisted upon returning to England, according to Robert Hugh Harris (Mr. Butler), whose petition l’or divorce was based on desertion. The marriage took place at Helensville. A decree nisi was granted. Recognised by the bailiffs who came to serve him with divorce papers at a boarding-house where he was staying with a woman who was not his wife, Alexander Hopkins, urged his visitor “not to tell the landlady:” This evidence was given by the bailiff in supporting the petition of Thomas Fredrick Lees, junr. (Mr. Butler), who sought dissolution of his marriage with Moya Esmeralda Aileen Lees, on the grounds of adultery. Hopkins was cited as co-respondent. Petitioner said he was married in September, 1922, and his wife left him in December, 1929. Alter further evidence, a decree nisi was granted.