SPECIAL TELEGRAMS.

Oamaru Mail, Volume IV, Issue 818, 26 November 1878, Page 2

SPECIAL TELEGRAMS.

[from our own correspondent.] WELLINGTON. November 25. Yesterday a sou of Mr. F. Mountain, of the New Zealander Hotel, picked up a bottle on the beach in which the following message was found :—" H.H. screw corvette Firefly, Captain Harmcr /Jones, wrecked November 2, 187S, on tlye* Auckland Isles. All lives saved except three A.B.'sand second engineer. Signed, H. Jones, Commander; 11. Leslie, Ist Lieutenant. Scud relief at once. Provisions all exhausted. Living on raw penguins. The Lord help us." There is no doubt that this message from the sea is a silly hoax. In the Divorce Court to-day the adjourned case of Digby v. Digby and Alexander came on for hearing. Mr. Chapman applied for a rulo nisi. The case was recently heard at Christehurch before Mr, Justice Johnston and a jury. The petitioner, a journalist, married the respondent, then Miss Caniilina Virgilia Pelosai, at St. Kilda, Victoria, in 1855. They afterwards removed to Christchurch, where they lived happily together, ono child being bom as a result of the marriago. In 1876 the respondent paid a visit to her mother at Adelaide. She had always had a longiug for the stage, and when in Australia joined the Wheatleigh Company under the name of Nolly Daley, and theremot the co-respondent Alexander, who is well-known on the New Zealand stage, and committed adultery with him. She continued to travel with the company after her return to the Colony, and saw her husband in Christehurch, but he then had no suspicions of her unfaithfulness. She left for the north with the company and Alexander, and continued her illicit connection with him until her husband heard of it and instituted proceedings for a divorce. There was practically no defence. A counter charge of adultery had been set up, but there was no attempt made to prove it. The decree nisi was granted. In the case Ryley v. Ryley, which had been postponed from last week, a doubt arose as to the domicile of the respondent. If he had forfeited or suspended his domicile in New Zealand by acquiring at Fiji or elsewhere, the Court would have no jurisdiction. When in New Zealand he wandered about; for seven years, but was held to have acquired a domicile at Fiji. He became a member of Parliament, and appeared to have settled permanently there ; but a witness named Power, who is hflw on a visit to New Zealand, and who knew Dr. Ryley when in Fiji, stated that he always spoke of New Zealand as his home, and intended to return. On leaving Fiji he went to Australia, and there accepted a permanent Government appointment in Sydney. Mr. Sievwright, for the petitioner, argued that the respondent must be held to have his domicile in New ZealsjwJ. The Court reserved their decision until Friday.