SUPREME COURT.

Taranaki Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 16822, 21 August 1920, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

TO-DAY’S SITTING.

(Before his Honour Mr. Justice Salmond.)

The quarterly sessions of the Supreme Court at New Plymouth were continued this morning.

DIVORCE PROCEEDINGS,

A DEFENDED PETITION,

Ronald A. Richter (Mr. C. H. Croker) petitioned for the dissolution of his marriage with Eva G. Richter on the ground of misconduct. Donald Morrison was cited as co-respondent and a claim made against him for £IOO damages. Mr. P. O’Dea appeared for respondent and co-respondent. When the case was called Mr. O’Dea intimated that an agreement had been' arrived at, subject to the approval of the court, as to the amount of damages to be allowed in the case.

His Honour remarked that he did not understand the proceedings, as it-ap-peared from the papers that a petition had been filed in January which was answered in February' and the parties had lived together again in April, A new petition had been filed in duly to which no answer had been filed. Mr. O’Dea explained that the matter had been before Mr. Justice Chapman who had.adjourned it pending the filing of a supplemental petition, and counsel was relying upon the defence to the original petition as an answer to the supplemental petition. The following jury was empanelled:— Messrs. J. W. Abbott, J. W. Downes, T. Murphy, J. D. Jenkins, A. B. Edgecombe, W. Barnett, R. Gredig, W. J. Battou, H. D. Lepine, W. B. Cruckshank, A. Cowley, and D. 1. George. Mr. Abbott was chosen foreman.

In opening the case Mr. Croker said the parties were married dbout 10 .years ago, and lived at Kohuratahi. In November last petitioner had occasion to leave home and go to Stratford or Toko on business. On returning home he found his house empty and a note from his wife saying she was not coming back—he discovered that his wife had gone to the house of co-respondent. He knew there was no one else living in the house with Morrison at the time. Mrs. Itichter and Morrison would be proved to have stayed at at least three hotels under the name of Mr. and Mrs. Morrison. A petition for divorce was filed by Richter, but after tho serving of tho papers for some reason or other respondent returned to her husband, who undertook, for the sake of his wife and the children, to forgive her and take her back to his home. She remained at home for about a. month from the beginning of April. Petitioner again had occasion to leave home, and his wife again left and took a considerable quantity of goods away which petitioner claimed were his property. It was suggested that all Mrs. Richter went back to her husband for was to obtain possession of these goods. She returned to Morrison and had not been back to her husband since that time.-

Evidence was given by petitioner on tbo Hues of counsel’s address. He also stated that on the occasion of his wife leaving home tho second time he went to Morrison’s place and on receiving no reply to-Ms knocks and calls, ho forced an entrance. Morrison came out of the front bedroom and petitioner remonstrated with him and said he wanted his wife. Witness heard his wife’s voice in the bedroom. Constable Potter, who was previously stationed at Whangamomona, deposed to serving the papers on respondent and co-respondent. They were both at Morrison’s house at the time of the service.

■ George H Barker, 'farmer, Kohuratahi, deposed to knowing both respondent and co-respondent and to having been at Morrison’s house and seen respondent living at the place when there was no one else there with Morrison,

Evidence was given by Ernest Crabtree, licensee of the Coronation Hotel, Eltham, and J. N. Anderson, licensee of the Empire Hotel, Hawera, as to respondent and co-respondent having stayed at their hotels as man and wife. An intimation was received from the solicitors for the proprietor of a Wanganui hotel to the effect that he was too indisposed to attend tho court, but his Honour agreed' that tho evidence was not required. Ho defence was offered and his Honour summed up briefly, intimating that although an agreement had been arrived at as to tlie amount of damages, that agremeent in no way bound the jury, who could award any sum not in excess of the full amount claimed. . The jury retired at 11.15 and returned in 10 minutes with a verdict for petitioner and damages to- tho amount agreed upon, £BS. A decree nisi was granted, to he made absolute in throe months, with costs on tho highest scale against-co-respond-ent. UNDEFENDED CASES. Emclino Schaare (Mr. E. H. Quilliam) petitioned for the dissolution of her marriage with Louis Schaare on the ground of desertion. Petitioner said she was married in January of 1904 and lived with her husband until July, 1907, when respondent lefc home, stating that be was going to the Argentine and hoped to make (jnough money there to enable him to return, and five in retirement within a few years. They separated on the most affectionate terms and she had no idea that respondent would not return. He gave her between .£3O and £4O when leaving, but she had received nothing from him since that time. She had made inquiries of his yelutivos in New Zealand, Australia, Colbmbo, and in tho Argentine, but could obtain no information as to whether he was dead or alive. She could oiler no explanation for bis failure to return as they hud lived very happily together. She had two children of the marriage living with her, aud she supported herself aud them by her own labour.

Evidence in support of petitioner’s statement was given by her brother-in-law, Hugh M‘Koy, of Normanby. A decree nisi was granted to be made absolute in throe months. No appli-

cation was made for oosj-s. In the case of Eltie Morris (Mr. C. H. Croker) against her husband, Harry Morris, a decree nisi was granted, to be moved absolute in three months. No order was maue as to costs.

Petitioner stated her husband was a jeweller, living at Hawpra. He left home in 1915 to go to Wellington on a periodical visit to the warehouses. Ho said he would be back on the Saturday following or at latest on the next Tuesday. When -ho failed to return she became somewhat alarmed as he had, since an illness. Been subject to lapses of memory at times. She communicated with the police and took every possible means of tracing her husband, but had failed to hear anything of E his whereabouts since ho left home.

Police evidence was also given a« tv inquiry having been made for respondent without success.

James Henry Keating (Mr. P. E. Wilson) petitioned for the dissolution of his marriage with Amelia Keating, on the ground of desertion. Petitioner deposed to being married in 1908, and that his wife left him in December, .1916. She took ope of thei four children with her and wrote to him saying she was not coming bank. He had tried to persuade her to return but she absolutely refused to do so. He denied that ho had given his wife insufficient money to iclotha the children. . : * In reply to his Honour the Judge petitioner admitted his wife had been dissatisfied for some time because of their poor condition. A decree nisi was granted, to he made absolute, in three months. No order was made ms to the custody of the children. BANKRUPTCY MATTERS, Motions for discharge from bankruptcy were moved and granted in the cases of Jesse Tapp (Mr. P. E. Wilson), of, Kaupokonui, and Henry Towler (Mr. C. H. Croker), of Hastings, late of Whangamomona.