DIVORCE COURT

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 209, 29 May 1919, Page 7

DIVORCE COURT

TWENTY-ONE DISSOLUTIONS A PAINFUL RECORD His Honour (he Chief Justice (Sir Uobert Stout) presided over a sitting of the Divorce Court yesterday, and heard tho undefended suits. TEONSON V. TRONSON. Isabella Iderlena Tronson, for whom Mr. Young appeared, sought a dissolution of her marriage with Arthur Eelward Do Oudray Tronson on the ground of misconduct. The parties wore married in July, 1013, and lived together for about two months, when the respondent left the petitioner, it was alleged, and went to Auckland, and lived with another, woman. The respondent returned to his wife once or twice. Later he -was in trouble in respect to a ring obtained from another woman. Ho went into camp in 1916, and eventually went to the front. When he returned to the Dominion he lived with another woman in Sydney Street. Corroborative evidence having been given, Hie Honour granted a decree nisi to be made absolute in three months, with costs against the respondent. ■ CURTIS V. CURTIS. Mr. P. W. Jackson appeared for Esther Curtis, who sought a dissolution of her marriage with Sydney Harold Curtis on the ground of desertion. The parlio3, it wns stated, did nbt get. on very well together, and in consequence. of the respondent's failure to maintain the petitioner, and his cruelty towards he] , , petitioner obtained a separation order on March 2G, 1907, with maintenance at tho rale of 275. Gd. per week.. Throe days after tliis the respondent cleared out, and had not been seen since. There were two children of the marriage. After hearing evidence) in 6upport His Honour.granted a decree nisi to be made absolute in Uireo months, with costs ■ agninst tho respondent. PEARSON V. PEARSON. Elizabeth Stuart Pearson, for whom Mr. P. W. Jackson appeared, petitioned for a ■ dissolution of her marriage with John Pearson on tho grounds of habitual drunkenness and , cruelty. The parties were married in Glasgow on Christmas Day, 1805,. and immediately after marnnge, the petitioner stated, the respondent gave way to drink. The petitioner lelt dlasgow and came to New Zealand in 1813, and later she pent for her husband, who arrived in August, 1914. A few months after his arrival in the Dominion ho save way to drink, and his behaviour towards the petitioner was very cruel. The petitioner obtained A separation' order and' ninintenance but the respondent never complied with the maintenance, order. The respondent wue sentenced to"-erven days' imprisonment or assaulting the petitioner, and to 'three months' imprisonment for assaulting his daughter. The, respondent wns drunk almost .continuously. A. decree nisi was granted, to he'made absolute in three, months, with costs ngninst tho respondent. MURPHY v. jfUßpnr Mr. P. K.' Ward appeared for a greyheaded loan named John Murphy, who petitioned for a dissolution of his marriage with Adelaide Kniily Murphy. The parties, according to the evidence, were warned on September lii, Ml, and a week later the respondent left iier home, and the petitioner received n letter to suy that his'wife was'going to Sydney. Petitioner saw his wife sometime later at.the Lambton Station,.and slie went back home with him, but niter another week she cleared out once more. On November 20, 1011, elm returned home, and left again on November's; mid the petitioner had not seen her emee. His Honour granted a decree nisi to be made absolute in three months. HILL V. HILL. Mr. J Scott: appeared for John Hill, a returned soldier, who petitioned for n dissolution-of-his marriage with I'lorrie iiill, on the ground of misconduct. Petitioner 'stated in evidence that he went to the war in 3915, and returned in 1917. His wife did not meet him on Ins return, and after a time he discovered that she was living with another man named Perhau in Christehiirch' A. decree nisi was granted, to bo made absolute in three months, with costs ivninst the co-respondent. STBATHER V. STISATHEIi. Janet Strnther, for whom Mr. P. W Jackson appeared, sought a dissolution of her marriage. .with Albert Edward ntratlier on the grounds of .habitual drunkenness and eruelty.l The mnrriai'o took place on February 26, 1898, at the Registry Office, Wellington. There ''were two children of the ■ marriage. In 1903 the parties were living in ' Brooklyn, where, according to the evidence, the respondent used to go homo drunk almost every night' and ill-treat the petitioner, who wns obliged to leave, home, aud had maintained herself ever since. A decree nisi was granted, to bo made absolute in.three mouths, with cosh against the respondent. COTTER V. COTTER. Mr. P, W. Jackson appeared for Alice Emma Rose Cotter, who petitioned for a dissolution of. her marriage with Frederick Chnrles Henry Cottor, on' the grounds of misconduct. The- , parties were married on May 29, 1391, at- the Registry Office, C'arterton. There wero four children of the marriage. The respondent wns a storekeeper at To Whal'nu, nnd owned two motor-enrs. In January las!, it wns alleged, the respondent wont away for a holiday Iq Pahautanui, where ho was watched by a private detective. Ho. staved n week at Pahautanui with another woman, who passed us his wife. Corroborative evidence having been Riven, His Honour granted a decree nisi, to he mado absolute in three months with costs against tho respondent. HOGSDEN V. HOGSDEN. Ma then' Hqgsden petitioned for a <iissoluhon of hiamarriage with Ada Mary Charlotte Hogsden on the ground of misconduct. Mr, P. W. Jackson appeared for tho petitioner. Tho marriage of tho parties took placo on July 18, 1910, at Wellington, and there wero two children. In February last on account of tho respondent's behaviour with tho co-respond-eut Firth tho petitioner decided upon u separation, and while arranging for this the respondent mado certain admissions which led to tho petition in-divorce. Cor. roborntivo evidence was furnished, and His Honour granted a decreo nisi, to ho made absoluto in three months, with costs against the co-respondent. BARRY V. BARRY. Mr. P. W. Jackson appeared for Catherine Barry, who petitioned for a dissolution of her marriage with Robert Deey William Harry, on the grounds ot habitual drunkenness and cruelty. Tho marriage of the parties took place at Wellington on May 7, 190 C. There wero jio children. In January, 1912, the partios lived in Auckland, where tho respondent worked for a littlo whilo as a storeman at 30s. per week. Ho was drinking very heavily, and tho petitioner had to leave him. She had not neon him during the past seven years, nor had ho maintained nor. A decree iuei was granted, to Iμ made absoluto in three months, with costs against the respondent. ROSS V. ROSS. Mr. P. W. Jackson represented Muriel Collin Ross, who petitioned for divorco from her husband, James William Murdoch Ross, on tho grounds of desertion. The marriiigo took plnce on December ]•{, 1912, aud there was one child. The respondent never maintained his wife, nnd sue eventually proceeded against him for separation and maintenance on the ground of cruelty. He never obeyed tho ninintenance order. Later the respondent wont to the front, and returned- in March, 1919, and from something that eiuno to the knowledge of tho petitioner she taxed him with misconduct, which ho admitted. A decree nisi was granted, to be made absolute in three months, with costs against the respondent. HARLAND V. HARLAND. May Agnes Harland, represented by Mr. P. AV. Jackson, sought a dissolution of her marriage with William Thomas llarlaud on, tho ffroiuid of desertion, Tho

marriage took placo on May U IM-. a 1 Auckland. There, wevo no children. When living in Wanganui l.lio rcspomlu - deserted his wife, ami, she had ne\t. lived with liim since. He was a sawmiller, and hud not supported the pet - tioncr at any time. Corroborative o\idenco having been given, nis Honour frnmled a decree nisi, to bo mndo absolute in Ihreo months, with costs agiunsc the respondent. HENDRJCKSEN V. HENDRICKSEN. _ Mr. l>. W. Jackson appeared for Florence Ann Elizabeth Ilendrickseii, who sought a dissolution of her marriage villi Daniol Peter Hemlricksen on the grounds of habitual drunkenness and cruelty. 1"° parlies were married on December l>, 1901 f and there -were five children, of whom ono died. While they were living at tho Upper Ilutt, aboiit four .years _ ago, tho respondent was drinking heavily, and when in liquor became very excitablo ami then always ill-treated the petitioner. Ho started drinking six weeks after marriage, and had not maintained tho petitioner for four years. Corroborative evidence was tendered, and His Honour granted a decree nisi, to bo made absolute in throe months, with costs against the respondent. JACKSON V. JACKSON. Mr. P. W. Jackson appeared for Jane Annie Jackson, who petitioned for a dissolution of her marriage with Walter Jackson on the grounds of habitual drunkenness and cruelty. The marriage took placo on May 20, 1913, and there were no children. The parties came to Wellington in I'M, when tho respondent began drinking to excess and ill-treatiiiß his wife. He never properly maintained her at any time of their married lifeTho petitioner had to go to work to maintain herself, and found it impossible to live with the respondent because of Ins cruel ill-treatment. The petitioner had to submit to three operations because of being knocked about by her husband. A decree nisi was granted, to be made nusolute.in three months, with costs against the respondent. ' BIRD.V. BIRD. A decree nisi, to be made absolute in three months, was granted the petitioner in tho. case of Eliza Ann Bird, who sought a dissolution of her marriage with Arthur Thomas Bird on tho ground of cruelty. Mr. P. W. Jackson appeared for the petitioner. The marriage of the parties.took placo on February IG, 1901, at Wellington, and there was one child. - Whilo in Blenheim in 1912 the respondent, who is a carpenter, began ill-treating his wife, and the position became so bad that she obtained a separation orde* with maintenance. The respondent later enlisted as. a single man and went, into camp. The petitioner managed to secure 10s. a week for her children. She hart been obliged to maintain herself all along. Corroborative ovidence was given, and fho petitioner was allowed costs. EADY V. EADY. Hildegard Eady, represented by Mr. P. W. Jackson, was granted a decree nisi, to be made absolute in three months, on lipr petition for the dissolution of her marriage with Albeit Eady, on tho grounds of desertion. The respondent iiled a defence, and the case was f<) linvo been heard before- a jury, but the defence was later abandoncil. The parties were married in Otago on February 22, l!)l!>,aiid there, wero two children, 'fho respondent, it was stated, was not an industrious man, and' was nimble to ' hold his job. He hud never maintained his wife, wlio was obliged to go back to (he hnnie of her parents. The respondent: went lo live there, but disappeared early in 1911. The. petitioner sued for maintenance, and ail order to pay 20s. per week was made for Ihe'-supimrt of the two children. The respondent left New Zealand with the Elowntli Kcinfoceiiients and returned last 'December, but had made no effort to find his wifo or support her. The petitioner was'allowed t ' oSl3, BADGER V. BADGER. Mr P. W. Jaclwni iinpciiral for Nell's May Badger, who pelitiniici] for a dissolution of her marring with Charles Phil p Badirer on (ho grounds ot habitual drunkenness and crueltv. The marriage look' place in England on March 5, 1910 and the parties lived in London and. Melbourne, and came'to New Zealand about six .veiirs !!«>. There were no children. Since coming to New Zealand the respondent hiid given way to drink, nnd in consequence the petitioner, m 191 i, obtained a separation order on the pi'ound' of drunkenness and cruelty. After ,i lapse of time the parties came together, on the respondent*nr.omising to reform; tho home in Welliiisrlon was sold .up, and they went to Auckland. Tho respondent liowover. continued to drink to excess, and the. petitioner.left him and returned to Wellington, and was later joined by the respondent, wlio continued :in his drinking habits and .ill-lraitmcnt of his wife. 'She had not lived with him since. A decree nisi was granted, to be made absolute in three months. Uosls were allowed. ...... ' . CUNDY V. CUNDY. ' Misconduct with a man named Law ; reiice W. Robertson was the ground ot the petition of 'Staff-Sergeant hrnest Henry Cuiuly, who sought a ■ dissolution of his marriage with Marguerite Gundy. Mr. ' P.' W. 'Jackson aiineiircd lor the petitioner.' Tho parties wero married on June 27, 1901; at the Registry Office in Wellington, and lived iit Brooklyn., and later at Lyall Buy. There were two children. The petitioner went into camp in 1915, and visited his home every fortnight «t the week-end. He met the corespundent about two ycara ago at hi* (petitioner's) house, and was introduced :to him by his wifo. .Every. Hme l>f came in from camp to Ins home, he saw the. co-respondent there. On March 10, 1918 when he was visiting his home Kiui'tho co-respondent was there ho'asked his wife to go to tho theatre with him. She declined to do so. nnd Biiggcsl.ed that ho should take Ins daughter, which he -cliel. On his return he saw his wife and the co-respondent, and he was told by his wife to slceij in tho tent, .is she had dono with him. She siud slio Deferred Itobeitson to. the petitioner. She had si'nec left him. Corroborative evidence having been jnvon, His Honour granted a'decree wsi, to be ni«le.abohi to in three months, with costs against tho co-respondent. , CROSSAN V. CROSSAN. ' Alexander GilderCrosnan, for whom Mr C H. Treadwell nnnoared, soiign: a dissolution of his manage with Agnes Crossan. on the grounds of desertion ami misconduct. The oartics were married on September 28, 1904, in Glasgow. In 1912 the petitioner went to Sydney, .mil in 19U he- came to Now Zealand., \\ hue living in Glasgow, Ins wile leu home finally in 1907. Tho. house was kept open for six months in the liopo that she- would return, but that ..ever happened. The petitioner enlisted nil 5, and was wounded at the Battle of ho Sommo in 1916, and while convalesc ng in England, in consequence of something le had learned, he■ went;to.aflorae n. London, nml found that l>? .**> *" living with a man named M Nwh lhe petitioner returned to Now 1 April 1917. and was discharged horn tlw Amiv in the following month A decree, nisi was granted, to bo made absolute in thrco nionths. M'COLL V. M'COLL. - Mr P W. Jackson apyeared for Bertha Alice M'Call, who notilioned tor <i dissolution of- her marriage />*,;?," Henrv M'Coll on the grounds? of h.ibitiial lnnkcunce and cruelty. The inarriaM took" place in AVellington in 1908, nnd procticuUv from the outset the vesnonlent Ijcgiin drinkiiiß to excess nnd illtreating the petitioner. Cnrobnrative fividencl) was tendered, and His floionc granlcd a decree nisi, to be made absolute in Ihree nionths, with v;osts against the respondent. • COATES V. CO.VJ'ES. Misconduct was the irround of the petition of Genriic Anirustus Coates, who sought a dissolution of his marriage with Ada Alice Coaies. Mr. H. V. O'Lcar.v iuipwired for lhe netitioner. The mar riage tool; placo on December %, I!HW in Essex, and the narties came to New Zealand about ten vciirs (igo, and lived at Pctone.. About, three years ago the respondent left mid went lo Napier, where sho had been living with a mat: mimed Harris. Corroborntivo evidenco was given, and His Honour granted a decree nisi, to bo made absolute in thrco months. M'ALfJSTOt V. M'ALLISTEIi. Mr. C. W. Tanner appeared for JlarjO. E. M'Allisler, of Raelihi, who netilipncd for a dissolution of her marriase with Thomas D. T.l'Allisler on the groiina of desertion. The marriage took \fha-. <it the Registry Office, Wauganui, on'

August 1-1, 1903, and there were three children. In 1911 tho respondent went to Australia without ranking any provision for his wife and children, nnd the petitioner had to maintain herself. The reeponfibrrt enlisted with the Australian Forces, passing himself off as a siuglo man. The petitioner applied to the Commomi'c.ilth authorities for niainlenanco for her children, which was granted out of her husband's Army pay, but she got floTiiing Tor herself. The statements of the petitioner were corroborated, and His Honour granted a decree nisi, to be miuie absolute in three nionths, with costs against the .respondent.