CUSTODY OF CHILDREN

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 776, 24 September 1929, Page 1

CUSTODY OF CHILDREN

HUSBAND AND WIFE IN COURT JUDGE’S COMMENT “The court has no very decisive choice between the parents, on the ground of morality.” Mr. Justice Smith made this comment in a reserved judgment in the Supreme Court today, in granting Violet Louisa Thomas (Mr. Hubble) a decree absolute on her petition for divorce from John Walter Thomas (Mr. Mahoney) on grounds of adultery, and in deciding motions for the custody of the two children aged six and eight years. The parties were married on January 5, 1921, the husband being a pensioner for war disabilities received while serving with the Australian Forces, the judge said. The woman had a son of which Thomas was not the father, before her marriage. Because of her treatment, the wife left her husband twice before October, 1925, when she departed finally. Her departure, however, was compiicated by a letter written by a man named Macdonald, who subscribed himself “Your loving sweetheart, Dave.” The wife had become acquainted with this man while her husband was receiving treatment at Hanmer, but the judge held there had been no infidelity on her part. On leaving she had told the husband “You can have the children if you like.” The husband then engaged various housekeepers, and there was evidence of adultery with one of them. The elder child left his father and went to his mother in December last. A rule nisi on an application for habeas corpus was granted to the father, but the judge said he had discharged the rule. Under the circumstances, the judge decided that the mother should have the custody of the elder child and the father, the younger.