PETITION FOR DIVORCE.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 16366, 3 March 1921, Page 8

PETITION FOR DIVORCE.

BARMAN AND WIFE. ALLEGATIONS OF CRUELTY. . Allegations of drunkenness and persistent cruelty were made in the Supreme Court to-dny when Amelia Ann Harvey, a well-dressed, middleaged woman, asked that her marriage with William John Harvey, barman, should be dissolved, and that she should be granted custody of the three children Counsel for Harvey said that there was serious conflict of evidence. Mr C. S. Thomas, for the petitioner, said that three or four months after marriage Harvey, who was then a stable-keeper in Taihape, came Lome drunk. Ever since then he had given way to drink at regular intervals. The family shifted to Governor’s Bay, .and respondent’s conduct did i\ot improve. In Christchurch subsequently his behaviour grew worse and he began to ill-treat, his wife. On one occasion ho thrashed her. When sober ho was, a kind and loving husband, but he was always going back to hotels, and acting as barman, and giving way to drink. For that reason, when he applied for the license of the Albion Hotel. Lyttelton, his wife supported the application. She thought that, as he was always acting as barman, it would be far better for them to get an hotel of their own where she could look after him. The Licensing Committee refused the application on the ground that Harvey was not a fit and proper person to hold a license. “DRUNK AND QUARRELSOME.” “ My husband has been drunk more or less all through since 1907,’’ said the petitioner. “ He lost his business in Taihape through difficulties, and his next position was as barman. As the result of his conduct, I sold the home up and came to the South Island. At Governor’s Bay, in 1912, my husband was all right when he stayed home. When lie visited town he always came home drunk. iie got vc-ry drunk at the Lyttelton regatta, and on the way home lie knocked my hat off and put me out of the buggy. In 1916 we went to live in Heathcote Valley, and he still kept drinking. Later on he took out a prohibition order against himself. About eighteen months ago Mr Harvey went to act as barman at the Mitre Hotel, Lyttelton. He is still there, and his conduct has not improved. Sometimes he is drunk, sometimes he is just muddled, and often he is very abusive- He twists my arms and makes me go under the table. He also grabs mo by the throat. Once at Heathcote he said there was a man in the house and chased mo outside with an axe. Last New Year 1 did not see him for a week. Two months ago he came home drunk and struck rne, so that I had to see a doctor. He is very quarrelsome under the influence of drink.” “ A DESPERATE RESOURCE.” “ Did you wish to come south from Taihape because of the widow woman in the hotel there?” asked Mr A. F. Wright, who with Mr W. J. Sim, appeared for Harvey. Mrs Harvey said that she came south solely because of her husband’s conduct. Have you ever given way to fits of violent passion?—No. Has your husband ever had to restrain you?—No. I have had to reWhy do you live in the house with him?—For "the sake of my three ehildAre you going to live with him if you fail to get this divorce?—No. I gave him a fortnight in which to leave the Mitre Hotel before I sued for divorce- He would not leave. ' The licensee has made no complaint about my husband’s habits, because he works such long hours. You supported your husband’s application for an hotel license, and wrote two letters to Mr M’Carthy, S.M., supporting that application?— Yes. When witness admitted that she had secured a certificate of fitness for her husband, liis Honor, Mr Justice Herdman, said that in doing so she must have perjured herself. “ I did it as a last desperate resource to try and keep the one roof over my husband, myself and the children,” replied Mrs Harvey. Counsel remarked that witness was evidently confusing the certificate with the letters. She had not put in the certificate. “ Have you ever been guilty of violence towards your husband?” asked Mr Wriglit. “Never,” replied witness. “ That is ridiculous.” Y'ou are a woman of means, are you not?—l don’t know about means. I’ve got mortgages. Are you worth thousands?—l don’t know what I am worth. Mr Thomas: Lucky woman. (Laughter-) His Honor: But that is ridiculous. You must know what you are worth. I am worth two thousand if all my mortgages were i)aid. His Honor : If your husband is such a hopeless drunkard, why is he still barman in an hotel ?—That’s what I don’t understand. His Honor: Then we are both in the same box. His Honor: Your husband is a barman at the principal hotel in Lyttelton, and the police there arc very strict. Sergeant .Jackson, I know, is a man who does his duty very efficiently. Why do tho police allow your husband to be employed in an hotel if he is such a drunkard? —Well the hotel closes at six o’clock, and he does not get home till eight o’clock or later. His Honor: But lie is an habitual drunkard, according to your evidence. Witness said that the chairman of the Licensing Committee said chat a man who had once been prohibited was not fit to hold a license. Mr Wright: Did Sergeant Jackson say that you were an unsuitable couple to conduct an hotel?—l did not hear that. Describing the incident on the Governor’s Bay Road, Mrs Harvey said that both her father and her husband were drunk. Her husband crushed her hat to a pulp, said she was dressed like a peacock, and left her on the road three miles from home. Re-examined by Mr Thomas: Witness said that her husband did not come home from the hotel altogether drunk. He brought liquor with him and got drunk in the house. VISITORS TO THE HOUSE. Elizabeth Pannell, wife of Louis Pannell, bootmaker, Christchurch, said that while at Harvey’s house recently Harvey came in at 7.30 p.m. drunk. To Mr Wright: I visit Mrs Harvey fairly frequently and 1 have neve r seen Mr Harvey drunk on other occasions. Iren© Pickens, waitress, employed at Arthur’s Pass, said that three or four years ago she visited the Harveys for a week-end. Harvey came home drunk on the Saturday night, and chased Mrs Harvey round the house with an axe. In 1920 for many months Harvey was drunk more often than not. He usually came home under the influence, and brought two flasks of whisky and a bottle of beer. His Honor : That was his stock. Mr Thomas *. He was a good mover. Mr Wright: Quite a King Country man. Mr Thomas: How does he carry his cargo home —ln a brief bag. (Laughter.) Witness said that Harvey, when he came home drunk, began by* making a fuss of her. As he drank more he became abusive, calling his wife names. Mr Wright .* Has Mrs Harvey been

in the habit of nagging at her husband?—No, not “ nagging.” To Mr Thomas : I have seen Harvey twist Mrs Harvey’s arms and make her go under the table. “ I have had to bring my father out of the hotel sometimes,” said Alice Delia Harvey, thirteen years of age. “ He was drunk. Sometimes he used to strike my mother. He used to stagger round and 1 have seen him helped to bed.” - Alice Wakelin, married woman, living at Heathcote, said that she was the mother of Mrs Harvey. She had seen Harvey drunk on various occasions- Once he could not tell the back door from the front. Air Wright: Did you tell your daughter that she was mad to bring this petition?—l may have, because I don’t believe in divorce myself. Has your daughter a violent temper towards her husband?—She would not have unless there was provocation. Have you seen any cruelty?—You can be cruel to people without giving them a crack On the whole, but for drink do they appear to have lived very happily?— Hotels and drink have been the whole trouble. Otherwise they had no more differences than the majority of married couples. MEDICAL EVIDENCE. Dr William Bates said that he attended Mrs Harvey on November 2, 1920, and found scratches about tho face and neck, a bruise oil the right forearm, a bruise on the left collarbone, and a bruise on the left forearm. The marks were consistent with striking with the fist. Mr Wright: The bruises on the arm would have been consistent with a man holding a violent woman?—\ r es. His Honor : The marks did not require skilful treatment?-—None whatever. They merely showed that force must have been used. William George Shaw, resident of Christcliurqh, said that he once saw Harvey under the influence of liquor. CASE FOR THE DEFENCE. Mr Wright, opening the case for the defence, said that the action had many strange aspects. One was that, though Harvey was alleged to be an habitual drunkard, he was head barman oi : the leading hotel in Lyttelton and subject to no complaints either by the police or the licensee. Prominent citizens of Lyttelton and Governor’s Bay would be called to say that they had never seen Harvey under the influence of drink. Another strange aspect was that ns Tat© as July last Mrs Harvey said before the Licensing Committee that their family life was untroubled. Tho respondent would fla£jy deny the charges in the petition, and his evidence v/ould be corroborated by that of reputable witnesses. William John Harvey, the respondent, said that he had never had any trouble with his employer. He drank occasionally, but nothing to speck of. There was no truth whatever in the allegations that he was an habitual drunkard, and that he had been guilty of persistent cruelty. He took out a prohibition order against himself at Bay because his wife made it a condition that he should do so before purchasing an orchard. His wife was annoyed" because he had acted as barman for a fortnight while an assistant was ill. His wife wanted him to secure the license of tho Albion Hotel, Lyttelton, because she wanted to be in business. His Honor: Mrs Harvey said that she wanted to get Harvey out of the Mitre Hotel to save him, and into the Albion Hotel to save him. Mr Sim: Rather a novel way to save a drunkard. Harvey said that big wife had a violent temper when put out. She tried to knock witness about and he had to hold her. He had never struck his wife. Once, after the Lyttelton regatta, his father-in-law and his wife had an argument in the buggy. He told his wife to get out if she would not keep quiet. She got out, but witness returned and persuaded her to return with him. Did you ever chase your wife with an axe?—l never did that. Nob in my life. Did she ever chase you ?—Yes, and threw blocks of wood at me. We’d had a few words. Did the blocks hit you?—l knocked them away with m3* arms. Oh. they got near enough ? His Honor: A woman hardly ever hits the object she aims at. Mr Sim : Apparently not, unless it is a detested husband. Did Miss Pickens ever help to put you to bed?—That’s absolutely false. Mr Thomas : Why did you order Miss Pickens out of the house?—Because I did not get on so well with rny wife while Miss Pickens was there. Miss Pickens did not interfere when you and your wife wer© quarrelling?— She did not. You drink occasionally? How often have you been under the influence of liquor within the last twelve months? —Oh, about two or three times. Were you under the influence when Mr Shaw saw 3*oll ?—No. When Mrs Pannell saw you?—No. Only slightly J.‘d had a few pony shandies. Did you ever have more than one drink when you got home at nights?— No. Very. seldomYou were never far enough “ gone ’’ that you could not get into bed ? Never. Were you ever drunk in Taihape?— I cannot remember any occasion. Why was the prohibition order taken out against you ?—To keep me from assisting in hotels. My wife does not care about me working in bars. Did you ever twist your wife bv the arms and bump her under the table?— Never. How did she get the bruises described bv Dr Bates?—T was restraining her when slio was knocking me about. You wore once well-known in boxing circles?—Yes, but I never struck a Well known in boxing circles and you pretend you wer© frightened rf your wife?—She had a violent temper. Mr Sim : When your wife got into these passions what did she do?—Stan i off and try to punch me. (Proceeding.)