SUPREME COURT.

Globe, Volume XX, Issue 1421, 4 September 1878, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

DIVORCE AND MATRIMONIAL CAUSES ACT. Tuesday, Septehbrb 3. [Before His Honor Mr Justice Johnston.] His Honor held a sitting under the Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Act, at 10 a.m. JEFFREY V. JEFFREY. In this case Henry Jeffrey sought to be divorced from his wife on the ground of adultery. A common jury was empannelled to try the facts of the case. Mr Slater appeared for the petitioner. The respondent did not appear, and was not represented by counsel. The petitioner deposed to having been married in 1874 at Cornwall. In September 1874 the petitioner and his wife left England for Lyttelton. On board the ship the respondent became acquainted with the corespondent, named Murphy, who was a seaman. During the time the petitioner was engaged as schoolmaster the respondent was almost constantly in the company of the co-respondent, which conduct was commented on by the passengers. The respondent used to continually be in the engine-room with the co-respondent, who was engaged to look after the condensing engine. The door of the engine-room was shut on occasions. Considerable familiarity existed between the respondent and co-respondent on board the ship. The ship reached Lyttelton in the last week of December, 1874, and petitioner and respondent then went into lodgings in Christchurch. The co-respondent followed them there and renewed his acquaintance with the respondent. Shortly after this the respondent left her husband for gome days, and on her return the co-respondent came back with her. The petitioner took his wife back, and they afterwards went to another lodging, where they resided for three months. Here again Murphy turned up, and on being remonstrated with the said that he should come if she stopped with the petitioner. The respondent then left her husband, and he was unaware of her whereabouts. Ho had gone away to Loeston to look after an opening in his business. On his return he found that all respondent’s clothing and some of the furniture had gone from the house. On being remonstrated with the respondent stated that she had taken what she wanted. She then left, and for some three or four months the petitioner lost sight of her, and ultimately discovered her acting as barmaid at the Criterion Hotel, Christchurch. After this he never saw his wife again, but heard that she was living with a man named Evans at Tima.ru as his wife. Petitioner then commenced proceedings for a divorce. Other evidence was led corroborative of that of the petitioner. The jury returned a verdict for the petitioner on all the issues submitted to them. The Court then rose.