THE PLUMBER'S WIFE.

Sun (Christchurch), Volume III, Issue 864, 16 November 1916, Page 11

THE PLUMBER'S WIFE.

A TRIANGULAR PROBLEM. HUSBAND'S PETITION FOR DIVORCE. A defended divorce case was heard in the Supreme Court to-day, before his Honour Mr Justice Sim. John Loudon, plumber, of Christchurch, for whom Mr J. A. Cassidy appeared, petitioned for the dissolution of his marriage with Florence Martha Loudon. George Lewis, labourer, of Christchurch, was joined as co-respondent. Mr Mosley appeared for the respondent, and Mr Alpers for the co-respondent. Mr Cassidy said that the petitioner claimed a decree on the grounds of adultery, The petitioner had been married for three years, and until the early part of this year had lived on good terms with his wife. John Loudon, petitioner, said that be was married to the respondent on March 24, 1913, There were two children of the marriage. Until this year he lived at 258 Worcester Street. lie was introduced to the co-respon-dent by his wife at Richmond about 18 months or two years ago. Last Christmas Eve Lewis came round to his house at the invitation of witness. The last tram had gone, so witness suggested that Lewis should stay in the house all night. The invitation was accepted, and Lewis stayed for a week. Witness spoke to his wife about Lewis's prolonged stay, and then Lewis went away. On New Year's Day his wife and Lewis went to the races, with witness's consent. Early in January Lewis asked him if he could take Mrs Loudon to the gala at New Brighton, and witness consented. Thev returned about 11.30 that night.

Mr Cassidy then proceeded to ask the witness regarding the receipt of certain letters, written by Lewis to the respondent, and taken from the latter by witness. One evening when he came home, witness continued, lie put his arm round his wife's waist and felt a letter in her blouse. She refused to give it to him, and he took it from her. He knew Lewis's handwriting. After reading the letter he challenged his wife, who replied that she could not understand it, as she had never asked Lewis to write in that way. Shortly after that he saw a mandoline in the house, and his wife said it had been sent through the post by Lewis. She said that it was a recognition of witness's hospitality at Christmas time. On April 22, a Saturday evening, witness, his wife and the hitter's brother, were watching a lire at the Gospel Hall, in Worcester Street. Lewis came up. Witness asked him what tie meant by writing such a letter to his wife, and Lewis said there was nothing in it, but that he had made a mistake and would not let it occur again. Witness told Lewis not to come to the house again. Some time in May a knock came to the door about 9.30 or 10 o'clock in the morning. Lewis was at the door when witness answered the knock. Witness usually went to work about 8.30 or 9 o'clock, and Lewis seemed surprised to see witness open the door. Lewis said he wanted to have a word with him, but he refused to have anything to do with him. In August Mrs Loudon asked him if she could go to the trots. Although he was not agreeable his wife went.

On the second day of the trots she went with her sister. On the third day he definitely refused to give permission for her to go to the trots. She replied that she would do as she liked. He followed her to town, and saw his wife in town with Lewis. IJe also saw her with Lewis on the racecourse. About 3.30 p.m. they disappeared from the course. He reached home about -5.30, and his wife came in an hour later. His wife said that she would please herself whether she went out or not. On August 19 Witness saw Lewis, and said he did not think it right for him to carry on in such a way. Lewis replied that he thought a lot of Mrs Loudon, and that they had made all arrangements for clearing away together as soon as they could get the capital. Lewis said Mrs Loudon would go off with him any time he liked to ask her. Going home, he met his wife at the gate. She was wheeling the baby in the pram and pushed the pram through the gate, saying: "There's your kid; you'd better look after it." He told his wife to go to her sister's. She stopped at her sister's that night, but returned next morning and took the baby away. His wife came to the house on Monday, August 21. She said she had been to a solicitor's to issue a summons for maintenance. Prior to that he had searched his wife's bags and

boxes and found a number of telegrams and letters from Lewis, and a letter in Ids wife's handwriting, beginning: "My dear boy," and concluding "Chin-chin, kisscs."ln July his wife handed him a letter sent to her by Lewis, who said therein that he was desperate and wished to see her |at the "old meeting place." Mrs Loudon would not tell him where the "old meeting place" was. To Mr Moslcy: His wife did not hand him any of the letters or telegrams which, in his evidence, he staled he had found. His wife had shown him post-cards from three different men, but these be bad not kept. Witness certainly did tell bis (wife on August 1!) that if she came I into his house he would break her I neck. He did not remember referj ting to bis wife as "Lewis's wife," | when speaking to Lewis. lie did say Once that be was going out to see bis j girlTo Mr Alpers: Lewis's sister married Mrs Loudon's brother. He did I not regard the letter which be took ! from his wife as a joke. He had teased his wife about "his 'little barmaid" on one or two occasions. ; His wife was a flirt. She always 'made out that she liked to have ("boys" dangling about her. Frances Mary Loudon, sister of the I petitioner, said that on a Sunday ! afternoon in January she saw Lewis and the respondent coming out of I the lupins at New Brighton. They j were alone. - j Evidence corroborative of the last I statement was given by Maud Begg.

Leonard Ivy Keat said that he met the respondent and the co-respond-ent one evening last Easter week walking arm-in-arm, like young lovers. „ They passed over the Hereford Street bridge. Koriange Johnston said that early in the year she saw respondent and co-respondent together at the band rotunda. Mrs Loudon asked witness not to tell her husband that she had been in the company of Lewis. On another occasion she'saw Lewis meet Mrs London at Latimer Square and leave for New Brighton with her.

Alice Parker said that she saw Lewis at the Loudons' house one afternoon. Loudon was not at home. Mrs Loudon said that -Lewis had called to give her a lesson on the mandoline. On another occasion she called at the house and found Lewis and Mrs Loudon there. They were calling each other "dear" and "darling" and Mrs Loudon was sitting on Lewis's knee powdering his face. Witness remonstrated with Mrs Loudon for carrying on so in her husband's absence, but she replied that she didn't care if her husband came in and saw her then. Mrs Loudon told witness also that she hated her husband and her children, and would go away with Lewis when the latter got enough money. THE RESPONDENT'S CASE. Mr Mosley said that the defence consisted of a total denial of any act of adultery. Mrs Loudon and the corespondent were connections by marriage. They had known each other since childhood, and were fast friends. Mrs Loudon was 22 years of age. On each occasion the respondent and co-respondent visited New Brighton they were accompanied by the former's sister. ~ The respondent admitted being at New Brighton on January 2 with Lewis and Mr and Mrs Tulloch. Her husband refused to accompany her. She did not go into the lupins with Lewis, and was never out of the sight of Mr and Mrs Tulloch. She did not go to New Brighton ort the second Sunday in January. One of the letters, found by her husband and written by Lewis to her, she did not receive. She gave each of the telegrams to her husband as she received them; the other letters she left handy ,so that he could get them. Loudon frequently referred to her as Lewis's wife and to Lewis as her boy. She I never had walked arm-in-arm with Lewis. (Proceeding.)

WELLINGTON CRIMINAL SESSIONS Press Association. WELLINGTON, November 10. In the Supreme Court to-day, Edward Alfred Foreman, against whom was a series of charges of housebreaking and theft of jewellery to the value of £4lO, was sentenced to six years' imprisonment.