DIVORCE TANGLE

Hokitika Guardian, 16 January 1929, Page 8

DIVORCE TANGLE

WRONG MAN CITED. AN" UNPRECEDENTED DEFENCE. EDINBURGH, November 20. A divorce case which ended in the Court of Session here to-day was remarkable for the line of defence of which the judge. Lord Atoneriefl, said there seemed to be no previous reported example. Mr James Whitton Robertson, of Springfield, Dundee, sought a divorce from his wife, Mrs Lizzie Easson Robertson, of Downfieid. Dundee, on the ground of her adultery with Mr Charles Edwards, of the Square, Lctham, near Forfar. Airs Robertson and. Air Edwards denied the charge. The hearing lasted a fortnight. Lord Aloncriefl'. in giving judgement, said it was assorted that Air Edwards was not addressing unlawful proposals to Airs Robertson, but was courting Air Robertson’s daughter with a view to marriage. The failure of that defence would lead to the necessary inference of a most audacious conspiracy and would have a disastrous effect on the reputation of numerous other persons besides the individual parties to the defeiiee.

Mr and Afrs Robertson were married in 1.908, and a daughter, Rboda. was born in the following year. In December 1927 Airs Robertson gave birth to a soil. Air Robertson declared that lie was not the father.

A DROSS DOCUMENT

The evidence as to a certain document in the case might be accepted as sufficiently displacing all the usual presumptions of propriety of character and of conduct in the case of Airs Robertson. The document was of a class of grossness ,in which schoolboys might take pleasure yet of which schoolboys would lie ashamed. It was stated by Airs Robertson that the document had been copied out bv her some years ago at her husband’s request. Lord Aloncriefl' did not hesitate to regard that as false. Air Robertson had. however, entirely failed to connect Air Edwards either with the document or with the taking of a certain pliotogiapli referred to in the case.

In effect the defence was that Air Edwards’ visits became more frequent under a. growing effcction for Rhcda which matured into an engagement on [Hindu’s birthday in 192fi. . Lord Aloncriefl' commented upon the groat improbability that a girl would profess affection for her mother’s paramour to screen Iter mother’s behaviour. Lord Aloncriefl' granted a decree nisi, holding that Airs Robertson had been guilty of adultery with some man unknown. He upheld the defence put forward for Air Edwards, who was dismissed from the suit and granted half his costs.