RETURNED SOLDIER SUES FOR DIVORCE

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 86, Issue 111, 15 May 1942, Page 6

RETURNED SOLDIER SUES FOR DIVORCE

CONTESTED CASE AT AUCKLAND <P.AJ Auckland. May 13. The hearing of a contested divorce case in which damages were claimed, was commenced before Mr. Justice Fair and a jury. Petitioner was formerly a member of the detective force, Charles Patrick Belton, described as an insurance adjuster and al present a sapper with the New' Zealand Forces. Respondent was Joyce Doreen Belton, and James Meldrum Scarlet, company manager, was named as corespondent. Mr. G. Skelton appeared lor both respondent and co-respond-ent. In addition to seeking divorce, custody of their two children and costs, petitioner claimed £l5OO damages irom co-respondent. Respondent denied the allegation of adultery and alleged alternatively that if there had been it had been induced by petitoner’s conduct. Mr. Robinson said the parties were married in 1933 and they- had a girl aged seven and a boy aged six. Petitioner alleged adultery on dates extending fom September. 1939, to March. 1942, said counsel. Between these periods petitioner _ forgave his wife and became reconciled to her. Mrs. Belton was literary and they I worked together on the publication I of a book of his experiences as a detective entitled “Outside the Law in New Zealand.” Counsel said that in the first month of the war Belton en- | listed. His wife later confessed that I she had been unfaithful with “Jim I Scarlet.” but he forgave her on her ■ nromise that she would never see I Scarlet again. At the end of 1939 I Bellon left with the troops for Egypt, from where he wrote to her regu- • iarlv and sent her presents and allotI meats, but in 1940 he received word ' from Auckland that she was carrying on with Scarlet. Petitioner eventual- ; !v broke down in health and was sent ! back to New Zealand, where he arriv•nd last February. During the 31 months he was away he had sent over I £5OO to his wife. Evidence would be given that Mrs. Belton and Scarlet 1 were living in a house in Surrey i Crescent during 1940 and 1941, said ' counsel. When Belton met his wife iagain after returning he was under i the impression that Scarlet had disI appeared and again he agreed to a ! i econciliation. However, said counI sei. he found it necessary to have his wife watched by a private inquiry agent. The agent took a flashlight 'photograph of respondent and co- ! respondent which Mr. Robinson dis- | placed to the jury. He asked if ; adultery could be denied in face of I that. . . In evidence petitioner said there was not the slightest foundation for his wife's allegations against him of drunkenness, cruelty and association with other women. His worst offence apparently had been that he had returned from the war. Petitioner was under cross-exami-nation when the Court adjourned.