IMPERIOUS BRIDE

Hokitika Guardian, 25 July 1931, Page 6

IMPERIOUS BRIDE

“BACHELOR GIRL” AND AIRMAN,

ILL-STARRED MATCH.

Allegations that a former SquadronLeader in the Royal Air Force threatened to"shoot his wife the second night after their marriage, and attempted to strangle her on the third and fourth nights, were made and denied in a petition for judicial separation, the hearing of which was concluded before Mr Justice Langton in the Divorce Court in London on May 22. '

The petitioner, ' Airs Iris Newton, said to be living with her mother at Addlestone, Surrey, alleged cruelty by her husband, Mr Thomas Henry Newton, D.S.C., who gave a London hotel address. Mr Newton denied the charges.

In granting the petition, the judge, referring to a pistol incident on the second night after the marriage, said he was satisfied that Mr Newton was not threatening to murder his wife. He also entirely acquitted respondent ot any desire to strangle his wife, A further allegation • made against Mr Newton, which he denied, was that he threatened to commit suicide by deliberately crashing an aeroplane.

Mrs Newton’s counsel stated that before her marriage she was “a modern bachelor girl.” Mr and Mrs Newton were married at the Kensington registry office in July, 1928, and afterward lived at various hotels. They parted after three weeks. Mr Justice Langton, giving judgment described the-case a.s “the most lamentable I have heard in a court of law.” Counsel had said that the reason the respondent defended the action was to defend his honour, and the judge agreed that any brave and chivalrous man would go to great lengths to defend himself against the particularly galling imputation of having been so cowardly as to be cruel to a woman.

Ungovernable Emotions. The judge said' he had formed the conclusion that the respondent was in some senses an abnormal man—not a monster of any sort, but a man ot very strong, ungovernable emotions. The court did not think he had .been accustomed to put any rein on any of those emotions, or if so, only so much as would keep him out of the worst difficulties.

That did not mean to say that all the faults of the case were on the side: of Squadron-Leader Newton, The petitioner was a young and modern lady, who went on her own initiative, and no doubt against her mother’s wishes, to live in London with her half-brother in 19217. There she met Squadron-Leader Newton, who was a man of proved courage, with the not very remarkable income of £7OO a m n Sr spoi fe& child and an. imperious young woman who was accustomed to get her own way in most things. • In tfie judge’s opinion Mrs Newton was a wayward and very wilful person who insisted to the hilt on her own will and was very unaccommodating to those who differed from her. She was esotistical. The letter in which she claimed an allowance of £3OO out of £7OO a year, and graciously said she would spend something on the house, showed- her to be a person of a very distorted view of the possibilities qf married life. Mrs Newton was a woman with no idea of »the value ot money. ,

Suffering From Nerves. Mr Newton was accustomed to exercise authority and to demand obedience. He would not easily brook interference with his will. “To use a popular phrase, he is a man wwho had lived dangerously,’ added the judge. ‘He is a man of no small historic ability. It is an education in the art of histrionics to hear Mr Newton pronounce the word ‘murder.’ When he says it, one understands the full meaning of the word. I think, if he used it in the presence of a woman—even a woman of courage—she might well quail before it.”

, At the time of .the marriage Mr Newton’s nerves were affected and he admitted that he was drinking more than was good for him, considering the state of his nerves. This did not mean that Squadron-Leader Newton was a drunkard, or anything like that. It was under these handicaps that these people started upod then ill-starred- and ill-asserted marriage. . As to the first act of cruelty alleged, in Kensington Palace Hotel on July 5, the respondent produced to his wife a loaded automatic pistol, and told her with that dramatic intensity of which he was the unconscious master, and with a voice of singular power, that he had the intention of committing murder. Mrs Newton was t frightened on that occasion. She had the idea that her husband was threatening to murder her, but the judge said he was sitisfied that he was not.

Mr Newton was not. a had man. His letters read sincerley andf’ "genuinely. He was capable of charming- moods, and of .writing excellent and charming letters, but there was an occasion when an acquaintance had unfortunately by a remark instilled into his mind a horrible suspicion of jealousy, which was proved to 'have been wholly without foundation. Husband’s Nightmare. Mrs Newton said that on the nights of July 6 and 7 she awoke to find her husband’s hand on her throat, and she alleged he was attempting to strangle her, hut there was no mark on either occasion. Mr Newton’s version was that he had the same nightmare on both occasions, and had dreamt that he was, struggling ‘with natives. The judge said

he entirely acquitted Mr Newton o' any desire to strangle his wife. In the judge’s view, Mr Newton’s act was an involuntary one, though it might hay© been a manifestation of I subconscious workings of tbe mind, and that in his mind there was this latent feeling of hostility which had been aroused by the suspicion—it was nothing' more—which was started 6n the night of July 5.“I do not think lie menaced her in the sense of pointing the automatic pistol at her on that night, but be did allow it to be understood that he was prepared to go to tbe length ot murdering anybody for whom she showed any preference to himself. 1 doubt whether he expressed any intention of murdering his wife’s half-bro-ther.” It was one of the tragic circumstances of the case that Mr Newton had suffered Horn the obsession, which had become almost a delusion, t' his wife, his mother, and half-brother were in league against him. It was utterly unfounded. “I think that the petitioner was in reasonable apprehension,” the judge added.