IN DIVORCE

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2624, 20 November 1915, Page 3

IN DIVORCE

; UNDEFENDED PETITIONS. ' Eight undefended divorce petitions were heard in the.Supreme Court yesterday afternoon before His Honour the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout). James Alexander Williams, for whom Mr. H. F. O'Leary appeared, petitioned for dissolution of i his marriage with Mary Irene Frances Olga Williams, on the ground of misoonduct. The parties were married in August, 1906, ana lived together until March last, when the wifeleft home. Petitioner,- in giving evidence, stated that, he subsequently discovered his • wife living in Lorne, Street with a man named Corroborative evidence having been tendered,'- His Honour granted a decree nisi to be moved absolute in three months, .

In the case of Janet Dorothy Payne v. Jaines Payne, the petitioner, for whom' Mr. T. M. Wilford- appeared, sought divorce from her husband on the ground of desertion since June, 1902. The parties had been married at ''Auckland in 1897 and afterwards lived, together at Auckland and Wellington, but since 3902 Mrs. Payne had received no maintenance from ner.hus-

band, and she was not acquainted with his whereabouts. The dccreo nisi was grantod in the usual terms. Dossi'tion was tho ground on which William Leith Adams sought divorce from Margaret Adams, to whom ho was married in 1909. The parties had lived together in Wollington and Carterton, but in January, 1910, respondent had deserted hor husband and refused to return to him. The desertion was

proved by corvoborativo ovidenco, and His Honour granted tho usual decreo. Sir. T. M. Wilford appeared for the petitioner.

Dosortion was also tho ground on which Margaret.Winstanley asked that hor marriage with Norman Winstanley should be dissolved. The marriage had taken place in Wellington, 1892, and tliero wore four children, all of whom wore still living. Desertion extended over a period of 12 years, and the husband had not provided his wife or children withi maintenance during that timo. Mr. T. M. Wilford called evidence to support tho petitioner's statement, and His Honour granted a decree nisi, the petitioner being granted interim custody of the children -under the age provided in the Act.

William Arthur Wilton, who was married to Eva May Wilton, on September 29, 1909, now asked that the marriage should be dissolved on the ground of his wife's misconduct with Joseph Brown, who was jbined as no-respondent. Witnesses testified that tho respondent had made au admission of misconduct, and His Honour-granted a decreo nisi, with costs against the, co-respondent. Mr. T. M. Wilford appeared for tho petitioner. •

Allegations of cruslty were made by Christina Jones against her husband, Richard Alfred Jones, but her principal reason for seeking dissolution of the marriage (solemnised in- New South Wales in! 1900) was that the husband had been guilty of misconduct with a young woman who had been employed at the Hotel Bristol. Respondent, had taken rooms in Hobart with the young woman, and tho police report showed that they were living as man and wife. A decree nisi was' granted to be moved absolute in three months. Mrl T. M. Wilford appeared for Mrs. Jones. Douglas William Hamilton was married to Margarot Jane Yowless in July, 1908, but it was not until three years later that lie discovered that the woman had previously been through the form of marriago. with a man, named Barnett. Yesterday Hamilton moved for nullity of his marriage, and, in giving evideiice, stated that there had been no children of the marriage, but tho woman previously had three illegitimate children, whom she informed petitioner were, all by different fathers. She also told .petitioner that Barnett had been married before she met him, and that there was no proof of the death of tho original Mrs, Barnett. Petitioner's counsel (Mr. T. M. Wilford) ■ stated that no trace could now be found of Barnett, who was known as ,an old-age pensioner. The case was adjourned jintil Monday, at 10 a.m. A decree nisi was granted in tho case of John Lucre v. Frances Emma Luore, the petition being based on desertion, which extended over a period of about nine-years. The petitioner, who was represented by. Mr. T. M. Wilford, left for tho front with ohe of tho Reinforcements, and had (it .was stated) moved for divorce in order that his wife might not be able to claim compensation from the -State in the event, of his death.