DIVORCE COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 5199, 20 November 1877, Page 3

DIVORCE COURT.

Monday, November 19. (Before Chief Justice Prendergast, Mr. Justice Johnston, Mr. Justice Richmond, Mr. Justice Gillies, and Mr. Justice Williams.) ATKINSON V. ATKINSON AND MORGAN. The parties in this case resided at Fox ton, in the Wellington provincial district, and evidence had been taken at a previous sitting of the Court. Mr. Allan, on behalf of the petitioner, applied for a decree absolute, which was granted, there being no opposition. ‘LLOYD V. LLOYD. This was an Auckland case. Mr. Travers, on behalf of the petitioner, applied for a decree absolute, owing to a necessary affidavit not having been filed. The case was held over to Wednesday next. AH TONG V. All TONG. This was an application for a decree absolute. Mr. Chapman appeared for the petitioner. Pccree granted.

WHITE V. WHITE: AND BENNETT. This was an application for a decree nisi on the ground of the respondent’s adultery with one Bennett. Mr. Travers appeared for the petitioner. - John Ebenezer White deposed that he was married to the petitioner in the Catholic Church, Parnell, near Auckland, on the 14th June, 1869. His wife’s maiden name was Sullivan. He believed that his wife now resided in Wellington. She was living at Auckland at the time proceedings were taken. She had left him several years. After she first left him he closed his house against her. Two years after his marriage, petitioner having occasion to suspect his wife of adultery with Bennett, the co-respondent, he commenced proceedings to obtain a divorce. However, she had succeeded in inducing him to believe that she was innocent, and he took her again to live with him. After they had been together some time, his wife told him she had been fooling him, and that she had been guilty of the alleged offence. He then left her, and afterwards went on a visit to England. He allowed his wife 30s. a week when he separated from her. When he returned from England, he found that his wife had committed adidtery with the co-respondent, and he commenced the present proceedings. His wife had been in domestic service at Poverty Bay shortly before he married her, but was ■ then living with a relative in Auckland. The decree nisi was granted. The Court then adjourned.