LIFE IN A FLAT

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8340, 29 January 1913, Page 11

LIFE IN A FLAT

WIFE ASSERTS DECEPTION BY GIRL FRIEND.

SHIPPED TO CANADA. ASTOUNDING STORY OF ALLEGED PLOT. LONDON, December 15. A remarkable story, in which it was alleged that there had been a conspiracy to get a wife to leave her husband and go to Canada, was told in the Divorce Court when Mrs Ethel Myra Pemberton was granted a decree nisi. She charged her husband, Mr Sidney Ernest Pemberton, with cruelty, desertion, and. misconduct* Though a defence had been entered the case was not now defended. _ _ Mr Grazebrook, for the petitioner, said the man rage took place at St. Ambrose Chafjh, Kingsbury, Middlesex, on June Ist, 1892. Mr and Mrs Pemberton afterwards resided among other places at 25. West Dulwich mansions. West Dulwich. There were two children. Counsel went on i!d explain that in reply to the charge of misconduct a counter-charge was put in by tho husband’s solicitor of desertion by the wife. In the West Dulwich mansions there was a next-door neighbour, Mary Hinton, who was constantly in and out of the Pembertons' flat. She sympathised very much with Mrs Pemberton, who took her to be her beat friend and confided in her. In the autumn of 1904 tho husband introduced into tho house and to his wile Gerald Essex, a young man about twenty years of age. Early m 1905 Mary Hinton told Mrs Pemberton she was going to Canada, and suggested to Mrs 1 emberton that tho best way to escape from her husband's cruelty would be to leave him and accompany her to Canada. hirer some persuasion Mrs Pemberton fell in with that suggestion. Two or throe days before the date arranged for the departure, however, Mary Hinton backed out, saying she would not he able to go tor a month, but would then follow Mrs Pemberton and bring the baby with her. Then, said counsel, the youth Essex appeared upon the scene with two ticket which Mrs Pemberton found ho had taken in the name of "Mr and Mrs Hs RVX.”

"A CONSPERA'CT." “What I put before you.” said Mr Gcazebrook to tie court, ‘is that this was a conspiracy between the ftusbajKl anil Mary Hinton and this boy Lseex to entrap the petitioner. 'io a certain extent they succeeded. Maiy Hinion was apparently so afraid that Mrs Pemberton might back out of it that sho slept with her the fast few nights see was on shore, and in fact saw ber-oft bj the beat.” Petitioner and this boy Hescx, counsel continued, travelled, by the steamer Kensington of the dominion Line from Liverpool on March 3Xet, IWJS. They occupied separate cabins in afferent parts of the ship, and there was no question of any impropriety. On arrival at Winnipeg, Mrs . Pemberton staved with a lady whose friendship she ,had made in the steamer till she obtained a situation with a family named Skinner. There sho remained for throe mouths, and having saved sufficient money to pay her own passage back sne returned by the same steamer, passing again by the name of Essex to save herself unpleasant inquiries. Immediately on arrival in England she dropped that name. She went to Ur© with her parents at Worthing. , , Later, with her father, said counsel, sftio visited the flat, 25, West Dulwich Mansions, inhere she found Mary Hinton and her husband living together as man and wife. In June, 1911, Mr Pemberton and the woman Hinton removed to _an address at Leamington, afterwards going to Reading to the house of the woman s mother. At that place on October 23rd. 1911, Miss Hinton gave birth to a child. She became very ill, and had to be removed to hospital. It was only then that her mother discovered that ; she wae not married to respondent. Since returning to this country, the wife had supported herself as a nurse. The wife, dressed in nurse's costume, gave evidence. She said that on one occasion her husband told her that he would like to tie hor to a be<T and tickle her feet until she wont mad. He used to bite and bruise her. Ho always carried a loaded revolver during the day, and at night ho kept it on the pillow. Many times when she woke she found it at her back. On one occasion he mad© her uuload and reload the revolver, hoping, she supposed, that she would shoot herself. Counsel; Did you confide in Mary Hinton as to what treatment you were receiving from your husband ? "Everything sho knew. —Did you confide in her as a real friend? I had implicit confidence in her.

His Lordship: Was she living alone next door? She was living with her sisters. There were three girls living

in the same house. Mr Grazebrook: This particular one had some employment as a typewriter? £es. Her husband introduced Gerald Essex.—Did ho come in from time to time at your husband’s invitation? Constantly.—A few days before you were to go away with Mary Hinton did she back out? Yes; she said she had changed her mind.— Hid she say that she would ocane later? Yes, in a mouth, and would bring the baby with her. I would nave given anything to get out of it.—Did she take you and see you off? She did. She never lost sight of me at all. A GREAT SURPRISE.

Petitioner was greatly surprised when Essex produced a ticket with his name and that of Mrs Essex. She afterwards paid for her ticket. His lordship: You had not found the money? No.—Or authorised him to get the ticket? No;— It was a great surprise when he brought out the ticket one night? Yes.—l asked him what he meant by getting it. He said ho heard I was going to Canada, and he thought that was the best way to go, and he had bought it.—Surely vou asked about the name ‘Tire Essex"? I was most indignant about it.—Did not it open your eyes that it was a planned affair? No.—How could you possibly go with him as Mrs Essex? I could not possibly get out of it. I said I would toll my husband and write to my people, and all that sort of thing. I was dragged into it. It was a. plant, and I did not find it out until it was too late. It is never too late until the shipsails, you know? I was watched like a, cat. Replying to Mr Grazebrook, petitioner said that on the steamer her cabin was on one side and Essex’s was on the other. His Lordship: Did you ask Essex what he was going to Canada for? Was not it the first time that you had heard of Essex going to Canada? The first time I heard of Essex going to Canada was when he actually had the tickets. He was an engineer, and I suppose he thought he would get a good living out there.—He was a friend of your husband? A great friend. His Lordship: I would have thought you were not quite so foolish a person as you make yourself out to bo.

Further examined by Hr Grazebrook, petitioner said that Essex went straight to rooms at Winnipeg, and she slept in the house of a lady whom she met on the steamer. Essex shortly afterwards went to San Francisco and got married.—From first to last was there ever any misconduct between you and this man Essex? No, absolutely none. Having travelled under the name of Mrs Essex, she was obliged to use the same name on her return passage in order to avoid questions. When she arrived in England she at once dropped the name of Essex and went to her people.—Did your father, Mr Walter Scott, go with you within a few days to the address at West Dulwich Mansions? Yes.—You had previously learned from your sister the nature of things she had found there the very day after yon left? Yes. Witness said Mary Hinton tried to prevent her getting in. but she forced her way. On the bed in her room she found a lady’s nightdress. Witness returned a fow nights afterwards, as she wished to see her children. Her husband said she had no right in the house, but he allowed her to enter to see the children. There was no one except respondent, Mary Hinton, and the children in the house. Since then the boy had joined the navy. Witness had tried to get her little girl, but respondent would not allow her. His lordship granted a decree nisi, with costs and custody of the children. There was, he said, no reason to disbelieve petitioner’s story.