DIVORCE COURT

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 60, 4 December 1919, Page 3

DIVORCE COURT

UNDEFENDED SUITS UNHAPPY MARRIAGES His Honour tho Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) heard a number of undefended divorce cases in' tho Supreme Court yesterday. JACKSON V. JACKSON. The case of Jncksoii v. Jackson was somewhat complicated.' Originally Martha Jackson petitioned for a divorce from her husband, and the latter lodged a counter-petition on the ground of desertion. The original petition was withdrawn bv leave of the Court, and tho cross-nctition of the husband, James Jackson, was heard yesterday. Mr. T. M. Wilford appeared' for the petitioner, and Mr. W. Perry for tho respondent, Martha Jackson, the grounds of tho netition being desertion. Tho petitioner said his wife left him in 1914 while they were living at AVaikanae. She was intemucrate in her habits. There was no reason why his wife should have left him. After leaving him she went to live with another man in Wellington, to whom sho had had a child. Corroborative evidence was eiven by Constable. Thompson, and His Honour granted a decree nisi, lo bo iuoveo: absolute after three months.

M'ILVPJDE V. M'ILVPJDE. * Mr. T. It. Wilford appeared for Peter John M'llvrido, who sought « dissolution of his marriage with Florence Ellen MTlvride, on the ground'of desertion. The petitioner, who is an inspector of electric lines under the Government. said lie wa.s married to the re6oondent on' November 11, 1003, at Wellington. The parties lived at Greymouth. Waiwinui, arid Lower Ilutt, and there were two children of the marriage. Tho respondent, who was of a highly artistio temperament, often threatened to leavo the petitioner, and eventually diil so in IDI3. She never applied for anv maintenance, and although tho petitioner tried fraiuenll.v to get her to return to him she never did so, and cventuallv left for England. Mr. H. Buddie, who nppearea for respondent, admitted the desertion, but intimated that lie would later raise tho question of tho custody of tho children. Corroborative evidence of desertion having been given n decreo nisi was granted, to be moved absolute in three months.

GIBBINS V. GIBBINS. Desertion was also tho ground of the petition of Mary Gibbins, who sought a nivorco from her husband, John Vincent Gibbins. Mr. T. M. Wilford appeared for the petitioner, who stated that she married tho respondent on September 28. 1901. at Ca.|K" Foulwind, and lived at Carluke, near Nelson, where the respondent was employed ns an engineer at a sawmill. In 1913 the respondent wont to Ca'nvastown, where it was alleged he lived with another woman. From Oanvastown he removed to Nelson, then went to Nvoia Bay, and subsequently went to a small township nenr Ohakune, where he was si it! living. The petitioner maintained herself and/children durinu' tho whole period of lie.- husband's desertion. 'Evidence in support . was eiven. and His Honour granted a decree nisi to be moved absolute after thro? months, with costs against the respondent.

PEEK V. PEEK. Mr. P. W. Jackson appeared for Edward Enoch Spencer Peek, who petitioned for a dissolution of his marriage with 1 -Evelvn l?o=a' Spencer Peek, on tho ground of misconduct. John Arthur Robertson beins named as the co-re-'nondent. The parties were married at Wellington on Anril •!. 1904. and lived at Wellington and at Christchurch. There were four children. In January, 1915, the respondent left tho petitioner, and weut to Pannnui, where she livctf with the co-respondent. The petitioner followed her a few days later, and urged her to come baclt, but she said she would stav with Robertson. The petitioner fnv her a second time some two months later, and <"• ; n urged her to return home, but'she atjain refused. The-co-resrondent said he would keep her. Corroborative evioence we.s given, and n decree nisi was granted, to be moved absolute after tlreo months, with costs against tho co-respondent. •

GIBBS V. GIBBS. " Misconduct ves the ground of the petition. of Jane Oil>bs. who petitioned for the divorce of her .husband William .Tohn Gibbs. The netitionpr, who was renresPiitod by Mr. T. .31. Wilford. said that after marriage she lived with-her husband at Karareea, Mnrchfeon;.nfltf Taumnrunui. and there was .one child. In Jtilv. 1915. in consequence of what fillo had heard, 'she tox»d her. husband with misconduct, which he admitted without shame. She left him, ami hid not seen himsinee 1017. Sh n had maintained herself ever since.' Her husbi'ii'' allowed maintenance for the child, but this stormed at the end of August. The resDondent was at present a.t Te Aroha. SiDCO the papers were served oi( him lie had'written to petitioner -niacin" several admissions. After hearing evidence in supi'ovt a decre nisi was granted. to be moved absolute after three months, with costs against the respondent.

LEVIEN V. LEVIEN. . Mr. T). nr. Fiwilay appeared for Leola Oa.mson Tabuteau Levien, who sought a dissolution of her marriage with Sydney David Levien on the ground of desertion. The narties were mnrried in Sydney in November. 100 i, and lived at Nelson, and resDondent deserted petitioner in 1!)09. The optition<M' was at present resident in Thiglann'. and the resnonder.t in Toronto, Canada. Sworn affidavits were put in, and evidence having been eiven as to the correctness of these TTis Honour granted a decree ni'i, to be moved absolute in three months, with costs against the respondent.

SARGENT V. SAB GENT. A sister's sin was the ground of the ■petition of Margaret Ellen Sargent, who soueht a dissolution of her marriage with William Sargent, on the ground of misconduct. Mr. L. Edwards npnenmv-for the petitioner, who stated that, she was married to the respondent in August, 1015, nod thev lived together at Paliiatua.. Kohinni. and Mangatainoka. There was one child of the marriage. The respondent left he" in March, 1017. and went to live in I'almerston North with netitioner's sister. Proof of pntitio'ier s statements having been given. His Honour crranted a decree nisi to be moveo' absolute alter thre° months, with costs against the respondent.

SW V. SIM. Mr. P. W. Jackson appeared for Florence Louisa Sim, who sought a dissolution of lier iunrrin','e with Thomas Sim on tho L'round of misconduct. This petition was heard on Wednesday of last week., and was adjourned for tlic production ano. verification of certain affidavit-!, and this having been done a decree nisi was granted, to be moved absolute in three months, with costs against the resnondent.