The Wakefied Divorce Case. The Respondent's Confession.

Te Aroha News, Volume III, Issue 153, 8 May 1886, Page 6

The Wakefied Divorce Case. The Respondent's Confession.

Dunedin, May 3. The case of Wakefield v. Wakefield and Another was heard to-day. Mr Chapman appeared for the petitioner, and Mr Cook for the co-respondent, who was not present. ( Mr B. Wakefield deposed that he w,aa married to the respondent on the 15th of July, 1874. During the greater part of their married life they had lived at TimaAi. When witness became connected with the " Wellington Press" it became necessary to remove his household to that city. His wife was very loth to leave Timara, where all their friends were, but she ultimately agreed to go to Wellington in March last. When she came off the steamboat she was very much depressed, and mentioned that Withers had aoeompanied her as far as .Lyttelton. Witness and his wife were always on affectionate terms, but after her arrival in Wellington she seemed to shrink from him, and for some time continued in very bad spirits, and although witness several times attempted to gain her confidence he was unsuccessful. Her dulnees seemed to disappear for a few days, and they lived on the old terms, but when she afterwards received letters from Withers her manner at once changed, and their relations became extremely painful, and almost, unbearable. No angry words passed, but she used to sit in silence, and appeared brooding. When it became necessary for witness to leave for Dunedin in connection with the libel case, he asked her if anyone had been poisoning her mind against him. She said no one had said a word against him, but she was very unhappy. He had a long interview with her, the result of which was I that she confessed she had been unfaithful to him in December, while at Timaru. Witness asked her if it was but a single act of madness, and whether she had been taken advantage of in a moment of weakness ; and she said she had formed an intimacy which had lasted for some time. Witness afterward communicated with her father, to whom she made a confession. The respondent's father explained to his daughter that there must be a dissolution of marriage. He asked her how she could have done sucb a thing, and she said that Bhe must have been mad. Witness still hoped that it was a delusion on her part, or that some favourable circumstances would come to light ; arrangements were therefore made that the respondent's father should make inquiries at Timaru while witness was at Dunedin, but it was found that there was nothing for it but to take proceedings for divorce. Respondent was now living with her parents. Mr McKenzie, manager of the Colonial Bank, said Withers had resigned the Timaru managership of the bank. His resignation was due to the allegations made against him. Withers admitted the truth of these to witness. The evidence of the respondent's father, taken on commission, was handed into Court. The Court granted a decree nisi, and ordered that the petitioner should have the custody of the children, and that the corespondent should pay the costs. [The petitioner, Mr. E. Wakefield, M.H.R. , is a journalist living in Wellington, and he left his wife and family at Timaru, where they formerly resided. The co-respondent, Mr Withers, formerly bank manager at Timaru, is a son of the late Major Withers, of Auckland.!