In Carnell Street

NZ Truth, Issue 1176, 14 June 1928, Page 7

In Carnell Street

As Sunnex was under notice to transfer his official duties from Napier to Pahiatua, the respondent, on Sunday morning, March 25. intimated that she was going to say good-bye to a friend in Faraday Street. She went out, but as she had not returned by noon, the petitioner decided to call on the friend she had mentioned, where he learned that his -wife had not called.Returning, however, he was surprised to see his wife coming out -of a house in Carnell Street. When questioned as to whether she had been to see her friend, she said: "Yes." Later, his wife became annoyed at his finding out that she had not been to see the friend, she had expressed her intenton ■of seeing in Faraday Street. She packed her bag and left the house. When she returned to the house again, she was with O'Dowd. Asked by the petitioner for an explanation, the co-respondent had nothing to say. Petitioner's next act was to order the co-re, out of his house — and when he went the respondent went with him. Next morning petitioner and a man named Rennalls went round to the house in Carnell Street, where they found Mrs. Sunnex and O'Dowd in a vei'y compromising position. It would be shown, said counsel, that misconduct was clearly proved. Of course, this conduct had meant the break-up of petitioner's home and at present he was living in lodgings with his children. The amount of the claim against the co-respondent was in no way commensurate with the irreparable injury done to petitioner. • To back up this terse outline of the legal requirements of the case, Thomas Alfred Sunnex, a railway clerk, entered the witness-box.