Wellington Divorce Court.

Manawatu Standard, Volume X, Issue 26, 29 June 1885, Page 2

Wellington Divorce Court.

FRIDAY.

(Before His Honor Mr Justice Richmond.) BANNISTER V. BANNISTER AMD M'GIRR. This was an application for a decree nisi on the ground of the respondent's adultery with the co respondent. Mr- Thompson appeared for the petitioner and Mr Brown for the co-respon-dent. The respondent was not represented. • ■ Charles "W. Bannister, compositor, deposed that he had an occupation m Fiji, but had been residing m Wellington' for some time past. In 1877 he was marvied at Johnson ville by the Eav. Alex. Reid, his wife's name being Anna Maria. Bartlett. They lived happily together until 1881, m which year his wife went on a visit to some relatives m Palmerston North. Daring the time she was away witness formed a companionship with M'Girr, the co-respondent. '■■■ On her return- M'G-irr asked to be allowed to live m witness's house. Witness spoke to his wife about* the matter, and she 1 was agreeable to allowing the co-respon-dent to reside with them. Some weeks after M'Girr went to live with them witness noticed a coldness on her part. Witness knew Mrs Harvey, M'Girr's sister. The letter produced was m Mrs Harvey's handwriting. It was addressed by Mrs Harvey to Mrs Bannister., and was dated 28th February, 1885. ' M'Girr is a printer. They struck up an acquaintanceship through working m the same office. Mrs Harvey called to see her brother several times. Witness told his wite that Mra Harvey was not a fit cem« panion for her, aud hij wife became very indignant. At the latter end of 1882 witness went to Foxton, and there for three days. On returning at 7 m the morning he found that some one had been sleeping with his wife. He questioned her on the subject, and his wife told him that a friend from the country had been sleeping with her. He found that the friend m question had gone away after tea the previous night, and had not slept at the house. His wife then said that the children had been sleeping . with her. In consequence of this affair a coldness sprang up between witness and his wife, and a few days •after his retiirri she left his housey and went to live with an aunt m John-stroot,. Thorndon. She left on the 26th of Jan- V vary. In a conversation which he had with the aunt, the latter assured him that there was nothing m his suspicions. A few days after this he learned that his wife had gone to live with Mrs Harvey, and that M'Girr had gone there also.M'Girr was m witness's house when he left for Foxton, but left it two or three days atter Mr Bannister went away. After taking up her quarters m Mrs Harvey's house, his wife wrote to him an abusive letter, m which she demanded some of her clothes. He went up to Mrs Harvey's house m Brook-street and saw his wife. She cried a good deal. She admitted she had been advised wrongly, but she said she could not retrace her steps. His wife went, to Casey & Macdonald's, and got about £20 worth of goods m his name. His wife remained m Mrs Harvey's house for & couple of months, and was confined while there. Mrs Phillips, a nurse, told him this. While m Auckland m March last, he received a letter from his wife admitting her guilt, and begging him io pay her passage out of Wellington. After she was confined m Mrs Harvey's house, he went to Fiji, and she went to live with her grandfather m Sydney-street. At her request, he sent her clothes to the 1 grandfather's house. He went to Fiji m the latter end of September, 1883. He went away on account of his wife's conduct. Before he left, ho was obliged to file his schedule m consequence of his wife having run up bills with various tradesmen. After taking up his resi dence m Fiji for about 16 months, his wife rejoined him on the advice of some fr'ends, but she only lived m Fiji for three weeks. She left that colony, saying that the colony did not agree with her. On returning from work one day, he found his wife very drunk. This was m Fiji. He had never seen her drunk before ; she was a Good Templar when he married her. At the end of three weeks, his wife came up from Fiji, and he also returned to Auckland. He believed they came up m the same steamer,she coming up m the sal-ion, and he m the steerage. On the arrival of the steamer m Auckland, £hey met again, and he accused her of wrecking his home. (Some evidence givgn by the witness at this stage is unfit for publication.) When he saw his wife after their return f rqm Fiji, it was at the e:id of March last. He ha;l not seen her s'uee, and did not know where 3.113 now was. The last time he cohabited with her was when they were m Fiji. At this stag-c the case waa adjourned until Friday next.