"I KEEP MYSELF RESPECTABLE"

NZ Truth, Issue 1263, 13 February 1930, Page 5

"I KEEP MYSELF RESPECTABLE"

Husband Gave Himself Testimonial, But Judge Not Impressed

DOUBLE DECREE NISI IN UNUSUAL SUIT

(Prom "N.Z. Truth's" Special Wellington Representative.)

Varied are the grounds upon which the petitions for the severance of the marriage bonds are made, and not infrequently the "other party" to the suit cross-petitions — also for a divorce — and, according to the law and the workings of the judicial mind, one or the other succeeds m the petition.

It is seldom, however, that both petition and cross-petition succeed, or that a decree nisi is granted to each party.

SUCH a position arose m Wellington recently when his Honor the Chief Justice, Sir Michael Myers, granted Frank Richard Pierce a decree nisi and also his wife, Hilda Kay Wray Pierce, a decree nisi. The wife's cross-petition for divorce was filad m answer to, that of her husband's: . Added interest was presented m the case m that the husband petitioned on the grounds of misconduct— and the wife admitted it. She, on the other hand, based her cross-petition on the fact * that a magisterial separation granted- her had been m force over the stipulated three years — and that the act. of indiscretion had been committed after the expiration of those three years. Counsel on her behalf, pleaded m. court that a ' contributory factor to-' ■wards the wife's indiscretion was the husband's failure to comply with the maintenance order made by-the--magis-trate — keeping her on short commons. Originally set down as a defended ease the defence was withdrawn at the ■ast moment and the cross-petition filed. Mr. Percy Jackson appeared for the husband and Mr. O. C. Mazerigarb appeared for Mrs. Pierce. Under examination by Mr. Jack-son,-Pierce, who is an electrician,' :•. told the court that he married his wife m February, 1908. There j were no children of the marriage, I but they were quite happy until i his wife cleared off to Christchurch m 1915 with a man named Willett, then a*steward on the s.s. "Maori." He followed his wife to 1 Christchurch, Pierce said, eventually locating her In Yogel Street, Richmond, but Willett was not there. "I got no satisfaction from my wife," said Pierce, "so I returned to, Wellington arid commenced proceedings for divorce." Continuing, he said his wife the\i came back to Wellington and the divorce "fell through." ' "' Mr. Jackson: What happened? — I took her back. . ,T ■-.. Where were ; you living^ theri£— ln .Mtfllis, Street) :Vher'e the^Wife^still is. " What were' your 'relations' ?-^We got on ciuite well until I found she was too familiar with a man' nafried George Freeman. That was four or fiv&vyears ago. .". \ ' : , ■; ]'}. ;: v * £• J '~ ■.' '■ '•• In answer to a question by counsel, Pierce said he was. out of Wellington' a good deal. lie returned home- one day to find Freeman m the room with his wife. '''■ The door of the room was locked, explained Pierce, so he went round to the window and . looked through. Freeman and Mrs. Piorce were there. He went out into the street for assistance and when he came back the door was unlocked, the French window open and Freeman was gone. Just prior to this, said Pierce, Freeman had a room at their house, but at this particular time he was living further up Willis Street. On this point Pieroe seemed to be m some doubt and was questioned by his Honor, to whom he definitely asserted that Freeman was not living there at the time.. "I remember now," he said. "I went to the police to set him out. He had no right there at the time." "What happened after that?" asked Mr. Jackson. - . "I left the house and have not. been back since," said Pierce. Continuing, Pierce said that m June, 1925, his wife instituted proceedings for separation and maintenance, her application being granted. With a man named Thompson he

made arrangements to visit the house where his wife lived, he told the court. It was just on "midnight when the two of thorn arrived there. Being familiar^with the place he ■ just opened the door and walked m and then entered the room which used to be his. Thompson switched on the lights and there was , Freeman and Mrs. Pierce. Thompson asked the man if he was George Freeman and on getting an affirmative reply remarked: "I've seen enough," and walked out. Mr. Jackson: Where was Mrs. Pierce? — She never. woke up so far as I knew. I then commenced these proceedings. Mr. Mazengarb had one or two pertinent questions to ask the husband. "The order for separation was made because of your failure to maintain and because of your persistent cruelty?" he asked. "So she said," was the reply. Counsel thereupon produced a copy of the order made by the magistrate and showed it to Pierce who reluctantly admitted that those must have been the grounds upon which the order was made. Counsel: You raised the question of your wife going to Christchurch at the proceedings? — Yes. You know a woman named James? — Yes. She was a boarder m your house? — She had a room. You remember your wife being at a party at your sister's house I and, coming home, found, you m 'this woman's room?— lt's a lie. •

You had a quarrel then?— She was always quarrelling. You ceased paying under the maintenance order? — Yes. Proceedings were taken against you again? — Yes, but not before. ; I had commenced divorce proceedings. You remember telling 1 your vwife when you got Jn arrears that you would, not give her any money ?/4-No. Pierce said he was told that his wife was living with Freeman at the 'time the separation order was made. Counsel: Has your wife ever asked you for money? — Yes; and I have given her hundreds of pounds. Do you remember her going down to a loan company to borrow money? — Yes, and I went down afterwards and guavanteed it. ' ■■-. You live m Kent Terrace, don't you, and own an Essex car-?— Yes. '. And a racehorse ?— Ye£, and. a racehorse. I've had ?iine of them and I hope to have some more yet. Isn't it a fact that you take women to the races?— lf Ido they are mostly my nieces. I keep myself respectable. That's why I have dozens of friends. Do you know a named Vera. In Christchurch? — I cannot recollect it. Do you remember a girl Vera you took out with Mrs. Woods?' — No. I cannot remember. You remember your wife asking you who the girl was and your saying it was the girl you were going to marry? — How could ■ I marry her when I wasn't divorced? Well, are you going 1 to marry a girl named Vera? — No. Do you know a man named Quinn? —Yes. And you remember some proceedings that were taken concerning an illegitimate child? — Yes. Didn't Quinn way it was your child? —No. Didn't the magistrate describe you and Quinn as a pair of moraJ lepers?— At the time he might have. That was at least 10 years ago. William Thompson, a laborer, called by the' petitioner, m the witness-box, related the incident on September 25 of last year when he had gone to Mrs. Plerce's house with Pierce and ftad there discovered Freeman. Charles* Sieywright, a clerk, said he once stayed at Mrs. Pierces house. Freeman used to occupy the same room as Mrs. Pierce. Before placing his client m the box Mr. Mazengarb said Mrs. Pierce, was entitled to a decree. The magisterial separation had been granted her because of the husband's persistent cruelty. . The specified three years had elapsed before the matrimonial offence, which was admitted, had been committed. This was largely brought about by the husband keeping his wife "on short commons." ■ The husband's evidence had tried to show that the wife was, or had, been living an immoral life, but this was not so. The husband himself had hot been living an unspotted life.:

Mrs. Pierce said she obtained her separation m Wellington m June, 1925. She supplemented her income by letting rooms. :

Freeman, she said, had been m the house occasionally since 1920. In reply to his Honor, Mrs. Pierce said she had no money to get a divorce at the end of three years' separation. Her husband was m arrears with his maintenance. In fact, at the present time he was over £200 m arrear. To Mr. Jackson, she admitted that Pierce had given her several small sums. Once when he won at the races he gave her a £10 note, and once he paid the rent for her. . Mr. Jackson: You said your room was a bed-sitting-room, and that all the boarders went, into it. They didn't all sleep there, I suppose? — I should think not.

Championed the cause of the husband | m the latter's suit for divorce against) ,Mrs. Pierce. Mr. Percy Jackson. His Honor said he thought respondent was entitled to a decree as well as petitioner. She was entitled to one before petitioner, but was not m a position to apply. " He did not want to say anything about petitioner, but he was not at all favorably impressed with him. Pierce would (have to pay maintenance on the separation order until the decree was made absolute, and after. A decree nisi would be granted to both- the petitioner and the croa^petitioner, to be moved absolute m each or either case, after the expiration lot three months. The question of interim mainten•ance would not be considered as Mr. Jackson admitted the magistrate's maintenance order was payable until the decree was made absolute. Pierce was to pay the costs of his wife on the lower scale, £25, to re- , cover same from the co-respondent and the petitioner would be allowed £15 costs against the respondent.