SUPREME COURT.

Hokitika Guardian, 4 March 1929, Page 5

SUPREME COURT.

SITTJ NGS AT HOK ITI Tv A

MONDAY, .MARCH 4th

(Before His Honour, Justice Adams)

His Honor took his seat at 10.30 a. m.

IN DIVORCE. Rose Willetts v. Richard E. Willets. Motion to make decree nisi absolute. -Mr Alurdoeli for petitioner. Decree made absolute, with custody of children.

Eileen Agues Karnbach v. Norman Karnbaeh, motion to make decree nisi, absolute. Mr Murdoch lor petitioner. Decree made absolute, with custody of children, with alimony as agreed to by consent of parties of LI per week. John Ferguson v. Harriet S. Ferguson and Bernard Edwin Ormond, co-respondent; petition for dissolution of marriage. .Mr .Murdoch for petitioner. No appearance of other parties. John Ferguson (petitioner) gave evidence that lie was a farmer at Herepo. He was married on lOth June, I!12b, to Harriet Sarah Parker. After marriage he lived at Herepo for one year and there was one child horn in 1920. Then his wife went to Wellington. it was her wish to do so. She took on a hoarding house there and drew on witness for the necessary funds. Witness went to Wellington and saw Ormond there at the boardinghouse. Saw his wife in Ormond’s rooiq, and later the door was locked. Went hack to lierepo at his wife’s wish. Later she sold out, and cleared out and he did not know where she was for six or seven months. He Was horn at lierepo and his wife at Arthurstown.

James Park gave evidence that he was a solicitor at Hokitika. He made enquiries as to the whereabouts of the wife of respondent. At Stratford he saw Ormond and served the notice on him, when he made the statements in the affidavit. He produced a statement signed by Mrs Ferguson.

Mary Parker gave evidence. She had seen Ormond at Wellington in a house that Mrs Ferguson was keeping and at Hamilton in a three-roomed bungalow kept by Ormond. The child Raymond Ferguson was also at Hamilton. Airs Ferguson and Ormond were living as man and wife there. Witness tried to get Mrs Ferguson to come away but she refused. Decree nisi granted to be made absolute after three months, petitioners costs and disbursements to be paid by co-respondent. Margaret Taylor Wright v. Royden Wright, petition for dissolution ot marriage. Air Murdoch for peetitioner. .Margaret Taylor Wright (the petitioner) gave evidence she was the teacher of the public school at Goldsborough. She was married on sth May, 1925, at Greymouth,. to Royden Wright, then of Greymouth, and now of Invercargill, bushman. After mairiage lived at Aloana and Stillwater. There was one child, Keith, born on February 2nd, 1926. Her husband had not contributed to the upkeep of herself or child. Her husband Avas physically cruel to her. She had to maintain the home. Her husband gambled a lot. After Avitness had read one of her husband’s letters, he violently assaulted her, and then her husband left the place and she had not seen him since September, 1925. Witness was born in Invercargill and her husband avus born in Newcastle, England, •and came to NeAV Zealand ,as a child and had been domiciled here since. Alary Berry, residing at Auckland, gave evidence she Avas a sister of the complainant. She knew Royden Wright. SaAV him in Christchurch, in August, 1925, flying round with a young AvidoAV. Her sister and liei husband had lived apart for three years from September, 1925. Decree nisi granted to be made absolute after three months, petitioner to have custody of child, respondent to pay costs. IN BANKRUPTCY. Thomas Arthur Howard, motion for discharge. Mr Murdoch appeared for an ’opposing creditor (S. Holley) and slated that in the last six months applicant had not paid one penny to the man he had assaulted and Avho had a judgment against him. Applicant examined by Mr Murdoch, said he had been employed fairly regularly in the last six months, earning £5 5s per week. His brother Albert HoAvard had agreed to advance enough to pay 5s in the £ on all proved debts. To His Honor: When living with his Avife and being on good terms, hi 9 Avife did not tell him Avhat she earned whitebait fishing.

To Mr Murdoch: He had not been able to offer anything before. He had not paid the hospital ox* doctors bills. To His Honor: He had not been able to make any offer.

His Honor said it was evident that applicant would have been able to pay all his debts if he had been an honest man. It was his evident intention to refuse to pay his just debts. Mr Murdoch examined witness at some length as to the facts in connection with the losing of £2O and his denial df the question as to his statement at a meeting of creditors was characterised by Mr Murdoch as a deliberate lie. Witness stated it Was not a lie. Witness was further questioned by His Honor and Mr Murdoch on the same subject, as to his statements at previous hearings. Mr Murdoch quoting from evidence at a previous hearing, read a statement by witness that his wife had earned £l2 in One day at whitebaiting. ! His Honor asked heytf it ,was witness could not remember a mdmenk'te^

fore bis Avife earning £3 in a morning. Witness replied that Air Alurdoeli bad asked if she had earned £3 before breakfast. Witness: He had not made any offer because be could not. His Honor: Could you not have paid os per Aveek in the last nine months. Witness: No. , Air Alurdoeli claimed that the Bankrupt had not shown justification and be asked that bis application for discharge be refused. He- was evidently a dishonest man and an untruthful Avitness and was evidently determined not to pay what Avere just debts. His Honor said he would make an order for discharge, conditional on bankrupt consenting to a judgment under Section 127 (d) of the Bankruptcy Act, for the sum of £6O to bo paid AA’ithin twelve months. His Honor Avas satisfied that bankrupt had made up his mind not to pay the man be had brutally and viciously assaulted and as far as lay in bis power to defy the processes of the Court, if be disregarded the order made, tlie Court Avould deal with him under Section 62. The Court Avould pursue to the utmost of its powers any man who makes up his mind to defy its processes and disregard the orders of the Court. DISCHARGE GRANTED. Charles A 1 ills, motion for discharge. Mr .Murdoch for applicant. "So objection. Discharged granted. :N, The Official Assignee applied for release from administration of the following orders: — Ernest Richard Hayes, of jKoite- . - ■■ r rangi. Sidney AV. Richardson,- of Hokitika. Charles A. Jolley* of Ruatapuj] William Morris, of Kokatahi, Alexander Campbell, of Hokitika. Victor Johansen, of Ilokitikp. Thomas Vincent, of Waitaha.' AVilliam J. de Lore, of Hokitika. John L. SAA’eeney, of Okarito. Charles Mills, of Humphreys. William K. Henderson, of Waitnha. Joseph George Freitas, of Hokitika. An order Avas made as asked for.