DEFENDED DIVORCE

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 1065, 1 September 1930, Page 10

DEFENDED DIVORCE

£SOO DAMAGES SOUGHT ACTION AT HAMILTON From Our Own Correspondent HAMILTON. Today. A defended divorce action was commenced in the Supreme Court today, before Mr. Justice Smith, and a jury. The petitioner was Joseph Loo. Machin, garage proprietor, Taumarunui, and the respondent, Elsie Clara Machin, Taumaruiuii, a contractor, Waldemar Rudsits being joined as corespondent. Against the latter £SOO damages were claimed. Petitioner was represented by Mr. A. L. Tompkins, respondent by Mr. J. A. Gordon, and corespondent by Mr. B. H. Northcroft. Petitioner said he married Mrs. Coffey, his present wife, in 1021. There were three children, two of whom had died. Trouble arose three years ago when plaintiff wanted to quit the slygrog business. He admitted he had twice been convicted for sly-grog selling and his wife once before he married her. They lived fairly happily together till 1929, when she left him after a dispute regarding sly-grogging. She sued him for maintenance, failing to obtain an order. Later they were reconciled. WENT TO WANGANUI In July last he and a man named Cullen went to Wanganui in a car. Mrs. Machin refused to accompany them. Petitioner’s suspicions were aroused and instead of staying a night at Wanganui as intended he returned home at 3.30 a.m. Petitioner, after knocking at the door of his house, noticed a man leaving, minus his hat and carrying his boots. He recognised him as Rudsits, though his wife alleged the man was named Bob Ford. Cross-examined regarding the relationship with his wife petitioner denied that he had knocked her about. There were a few scuffles over his wife’s drinking, but he had uot blacked her eyes. (Proceeding.)