SUPREME COURT.

Hokitika Guardian, 3 December 1921, Page 1

SUPREME COURT.

|nv Ttsl.liOlfAl’H I’EU PitlitiS ASSOCIATION ) A DIVORCE CASE. WELI.IXOTOX, Nov 30. Judgment was given by the ActingChief Justice (Mr Justice Sim), in the Supreme Court to-day on a petition for dissolution oL marriage filed by Marshall John Donnelly. His Honour refused the petition. In hits judgment he referred to the tact that,-in August, J9lB, the respondent Jlughona Jessie Donnelly .obtained a, decree of judicial separation against the petitioner. It was on the existence of this decree that the petitioner based his claim in tho present suit. Piima facie the petitioner was entitled to have his marriage dissolved. The only (|uestion was whether the Com t should refuse to grant him any relief. The ground on which the decree for judicial separation was granted was that the petitioner had committed adultery with a womnn (Miss X.) The petitioner reunite 1 constant, care and attention, and th he said. Miss X bestowed on him. devoted was she a snurse that the fetilionet) vlesircd to give h> i th- 1 st.u of his wife, lie denied, hou . vrr. that he was living m adultery with her. I m n ., tl ,re of the disease from which Don uellv was sutlering made that star mem credible. The resisimlcnt. said Ills Honour. declared that she still retainedJ afreet ion for the petitions an 1 sat that she was willing to take him ha< k i he would/ give up Miss X. The petitioner declined. 1,-we or. to go back to his wife. It was contended, on ttehalt „f the; respondent, that the case was thus brought, within the very words of the Court of Appeal in Mason v. Mason. “This ease is thus resolved.” said his Honour, “into a contest between the respondent and Miss X as to which of them is to have the privilege of being petitioner’s nurse, and of becoming his widow. Ihe ( ourt. in mv opinion. should not help a sinner to gain any advantage aO the expense of a blameless wife, and should refuse to dissolve the cxisling marriage. The petition is accordingly dismissed, with costs to the respondent.”

.rrncF. outers FT.occrvn. | A siiinlilv-l.nilt man, Thomas f!ill, ]a pi rod in tin' Simromo Court at J Wanganui on Saturday for sentem** hc- | fore Mr .1 iistico Rp-I. having henj> enn- [ voted of a i■rini in a 1 assault on a iliar- | I'iod woman at f'titu while her hiiehand 1 whs away. On accused's liofialf 1011100! roiiiaTic’ll i lliat tin* prisoner wantod it proclaiin- : 'd in tlio Court ami given the fullost f rmlilii it\ tint lit’ liolioyod tlio woman ' in !io a good and pure woman, and that i I" lin'd received n encouragement from hrr. Further. that ho had done lior a great wrong. wliioli he fervently wished' to ropair. Ilis Honour said the prisoner had linen found guilty of a particularly atroj<• i nis crime. Tim storv told hy the . woman raised an uneasy suspicion in his Honour's mind, that she was not the j first woman that ihe nrisnner liad 'aid ’ll | this position. Ffe had no riVlit to take ■that suspicion into consideration, nor did lie do so. »The .sentence ho was nh'int to impose would act as a warning that women were wt to lie molested. The prisoner was sentenced to sere 11 years’ imprisonment, and was in addi- , linn .ordered to lie flogged with ten j strokes of the eat o-nine-t a its ! 1