SUPREME COURT

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2319, 28 November 1914, Page 11

SUPREME COURT

DIVORCE PETITION

FINDINGS OF THE JURY

Hearing of the divorce action in which 'William Percy Salmon sought a dissolution of his marriage with Flora lanny Salmon was concluded at the Supreme Court yesterday before His Honour Mr. Justice Edwards ' and a jury of. twelve. Mr. W. Perry appeared for the petitioner, and Mr. P. W. Jack' soil for the ; -respondent. The grounds for the petition' Were alleged miscon-duefc-aiid drunkenness oiutho part of the wife. " ..When the Court, resumed, His Honour said he was exceedingly doubtful as to whether thero was sufficient evidence to support either charge against the respondent. Ho had come to the conclusion, however, not to withdraw the caso from the jury, but would'reserve leave for the respondent, if necessary, to move subseqeutly oil that question. Evidence was, given for the defence by the respondent and one other witness. An absolute denial 1 was given to the allegations of misconduot and drunkenness. > '

'1 ho.jury retired at 4.8 p.m., md 'returned at 4.55 p.m., when the' foreman announced that the issues submitted had been answered in the following terms:— Was the petitioner lawfully married to the respondent P—Admitted, yes. Did the respondent live as a prostitute from- the month'of' March, 1914, to tho month of September, 1914?— Not sufficient evidence. • 16 respondent commit adultery with divers persons whose names aro unknown to the petitioner from the month of March, 1914, to the month of September, 1914?— Not sufficient evidence. Has the respondent been an habitual drunkard for the last four years and upwards, namely, since the year 1909 ? -—Yes. . • 1 Has the respondent habitually neglected her domestio duties and .rendered herself unfit to • discharge thofai for the last four years and upwards?— Yes. Have the petitioner's own habits or conduct induced or contributed to the wrongs complained of?— Yes. • Mr. Perry moved for a decree nisi on. tho jury's findings, but Mr. Jackson submitted' that the verdict was in favour of the respondent, and that the -petit-ion', should be dismissed.

■ His Honour considered the ' matter could he hotter argued at a later stage, and adjourned the case to a date to. he fixed.

" AN UNDEFENDED CASE. Before His Honour the Chief Justice CSir liebort Stout) yesterday afternoon, Maj-y Louisa Clark,'for whom Mr. P. J/O'Resan appeared, petitioned for dissolution of her marriage with Templeton Clark oil tho grounds of cruelty and misconduct. Tho parties wore married in Wellington in October, 1896, and there were six • nildren of the marriage. Foiir of 'the children wero boarded out under an order of the Magistrate's Court-,: and the petitioner asked for custody of the other tivo The case-was not defended, and His Honour, after hearing evidence, granted a decree nisi to be made absolute in throe months, the. petitiouer to havo interim custody of. the two children mentioned.

RAILWAY SERVANTS' APPEALS. His Honour the Chief Justice ' (Sir Rebert : Stout) presided at the hearing of -an originating summons under the Declaratory Judgments Act, concerning, .appeals by ; .rail\vay servants to the vAppeal Board. The plaintiffs were the Amalgamated Society of Railway Ser-, vants of New Zealand, and the defendant the Minister of Railways.. Mr. M. Myers appeared for the Society, and the Solicitor-General (Mr. J. W. Salmond) for the-Minister. '. When the case came before His Honour, the Solicitor-General agreed that tho view -taken by the Society, as to the procedure to be followed in connection with appeals, was tEo correct, one. , Mr. W. R. Haselden, chairman of the: Appeal Board, also (it was stated) agreed aiid would in. future adopt that procedure. His Honour concurred. A,POSITION ON THE "RAILWAY 0 REVIEW." ' Had the Executive Counci' of the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants power to appoint the general secretary of tho Society to' the position of manager of the "Railway Review," at a salary of £80 per annum? This was briefly-, the question raised hv an originating • summons, ill which the plaintiffs were William Wells and M. J. Lee, of the Thormlon branch, A.S.R-.5., and the defendant# the Executive Council of the Amalgamated Society ■of Railway Servants. The 'case was taken before -His Honour the .Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout)'yesterday afternoon, Mr. T. C. A. Hislop appearing for tho plaintiffs, and Mr. M. Myers for the defendants.

After legal, argument, His Honour reserved-decision.

AN ADJOURNMENT. _ A case under the Mortgages Extension Act and tlie Goods and Chattels Transfer Act was one in which William Ward, carrier, of Wellington, applied for an order of the Court giving him the right of entiyr and seizure in connection with a loan to John' Hopwell, engineer, of Wellington.' ■ Mr. M. J. Crombio appeared for the plaintiff, while Mr. H. L. Machell appeared for the defendant. From • the facts placed before the Court by Mr. Crombie, it appeared that plaintiff had advanced sums of money to the defendant or on his behalf to ! a total amount of £175 10s., and was unable to got any return. He had in fact been paying rent for the defendant to protect the security. The case was adjourned until December. 14 to.giro Mr-. Machell an opportunity of .seeing if his client could make any offer.

COURT OP ARBITRATION

A WANGANUI CASE. As the result of tlio death of a labourer named William Brand, at Wanganui, compensation has been granted by tlio Arbitration. Court. The parties in the ' action wero tlio Public Trustee, as administrator of deceased's .estate (plaintiff) and Russell and Bignoll, Ltd. (defendants), and tlio claim was heard at Wanganui on November 20. Brand died as tlie result of ail accident arising out of, and in the courso of, his employment by the defendants as a builder's labourer, and . tho only' questionbetween the parties was as to the basis upon which compensation should he assessed. In tlio judgment of the Court (which was received by the Clerk of Awards, Mr. G S. Clark yesterday), His Honour Mr. Justice Stringer gavo judgment for the plaintiff for the amount of £405 135., together with £14 6s. for funeral and medical expenses, £7 7s. costs, and witnesses' expenses to be settled l by the Registrar. At the hearing Mr. C. B. Collins appeared for tho plaintiff, while Mr. C. C. Hutton represented the defendants.

•-Dominiofl" Office,