Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

DIVORCE COURT

PETITIONER FAILS IN HIS SUIT.

In tho Divorce Court yesterday, befoi* His Honour the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) and a jury of twelve, the'suit of "•Wilson v. Wilson was heard. This was a petition of David Wilson, blacksmith, of Eintoul Street, Wellington, who sought a dissolution of his marriage with Susan Wilson, on the ground of misconduct, Thomas Harris being named as tho co-respondent. No damages wero claimed.

Mr. H. F. O'Lenry appeared for tt'# petitioner, and Mr. P. W. Jnckson for the respondent. Tho parties wore married on August 21, 1903.' Some l\ years ago the petitioner left liia wife because of her drinking habits. Tlio allegations of Hie petitioner were supported by the evidence of two witnesses.

The defence was to the effect that the petitioner's statements wore not correct. The respondent.stated that on April 21 the co-respondent called on her about 7 o'clock in the evening. She had asked him to !;et some whisky because the was suffering from inJlucum. The petitioner had previously 'been to tlio liousb attempting to interfere with her, and shortly after Horn's came into the house tho petitioner rushed in and drugged lum out. Tlio respondent denied that there was any misconduct on her part. In cross-examination tlio respondent fflid that she was in a dressing gown when Harris camo to the hoaso that evening. She had known the co-respondent over sinco she' was. a child. Sho denied being addicted to liquor. Tho co-respondent, Thomas William Harris, a carter, G7 years of age. said he liad been married for about K years. On the date in question ho went to the respondent's house at 7.20 p.m. to take her a drop of whisky, which Mrs. Wilson had requested him to get her in the morning. Ho was going to lite pictures that evening, and cal*d at the respondent's on his way. He entered tho kitchen, and while ho was sitting on a sofa Wilson came in after the lapse of five minutes, called him a "dirty dog," caught, him by the throat, disarranged jus clothing, and dragged him outside. There were two men waiting, and ho called upon them to tako notice of witness's condition,

To Mr. 0 Leary witness admitted that, he had "words" with his wife over Mrs Wilson.

-the jury after a retirement of about an hour found that tlio respondent and co-respondent had not been guilty of mis. conduct, mid the petition was accordingly dismissed. The question of costs was reserved.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19190813.2.13

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 272, 13 August 1919, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
416

DIVORCE COURT Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 272, 13 August 1919, Page 3

DIVORCE COURT Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 272, 13 August 1919, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert