IMPORTANT JUDGEMENT. WHAT CONSTITUTES "DESERTION." Auckland, Apiil 5.

Te Aroha News, Volume V, Issue 253, 7 April 1888, Page 5

IMPORTANT JUDGEMENT. WHAT CONSTITUTES "DESERTION." Auckland, Apiil 5.

Ai the Supieme Coiut this morning, Hi, Honor (.Mr Justice (Jdh.s) gave judgment in the clnoieo case Kelly \. Kelly as follow -> . —"Till', 1-, a Mill by a wiio against Ik i husband loi judicial sepaiation, on the giound ul tlic husband's desei tion lot o\tr i wo v \ cdi-, the wito being hi bcoilunel and ihe husband in ,\u\\ Zealand. The husband simpk iluiic- the de.-eition, oiiei-> no I'MUdice, bub iea\ s the ca»c to bo dolei mined upon the evidence ad tuced by Liv ay iit_ hei. -ell, M/. , hei own cudeiui. and lit) 1 husband-, lett I>. iht ia< ls a-, pioud b) the petitioner aie eeilaiul^ peet.liui. The icspondent, a widow ci with loin elulaieii, u colunisl ol hoi.lh Austiaha, aged 59 oi 40, in goon cu ciiiu^L<uill'^, went homo to beotland, aim a.ter two mouths' acquaintance, m Ittiu niaitiCLl Lhc pililionei, then a spimiei oi the npe age- ol k;9. Alter -some months lta\elling about the} lutumed to boutn Au>ltaha, wheic, in the neighborhood ol Adeluiue, the} continued to co habit, ana twoehildieu weie bom, the hist or whom dii.il Tlie ii ,-pondcnt, in ajcoidunee \uih pic\iou& auan o einunt, went to .Now Zealand to elect land on which to settle, and ictiuned to ttie petitiono! m Adelaide in Maid), lb/5. boon attei he lotuined to !Scw Zi al<tnd, taking with him tlnee ot the dnldiui oi In- ln-t niaiuage, lea\m^ with lid aunt .t Adelaide one oi iheehildien oi in- lit — - 1 man luge, rhc iiutitiuner (lljl.ii ill witli i huimuU-m) and Ik-i cluid. \\ liun lit ■so tiled iluw n in JNV rt Zealand, at Z\langa\\ ai, he e\ idem Is ir. an to think, oi laihei, peiInip-, hi> pit'Mous e\|)ci icncc deepened into I a eon\ n lion, tii.it tue poLilionui and he iron d not in luij py togeLlici, ounm t.i hci .idtmtlcil ignuiunee ut h u^ekeLpm^, and fiiliu 1 cucLiui^tance-. hidi i nettl noL allude to tie »u mioimed hoi on J III3 251h, 1876, and Mib^e(j.ucntl\ (in leim> uhicii I cannot do othei than lcpiobate) (.adtied hi 1 to leti'tn to hot lelauve^ in ollci my to pa\ lier pas-a^e anil t il io w hei lib iiei annum. Altei the dela\ oi ncai i\ i\\o\eui^ •-lie, in Juik, 1878, ac(;opted tlie oiiei, wa.s puniaed with a pa-^u^e lion c, and. until Aumi^-t, looki. ic(i'i\fn lv 1 allowance ol L7o per .uuumi. In ILoC; he dein.indcd t licit the child ut the niiUiiage (then li\e yeait ut age) -hould I)!, -cut out to linn, to icu'Ul'.i pi. k tied lathei than a tlieoietical e.aaation. The petiliontr lelu-ed (natin .11} ) to pail with tlie child, and the ic-poiuiLnl. in luBi -toppeil hi^ allowance. '1 he petitionei in ]Cu6 In ought this --nit lot deceit on The le^pondeni ie()iie-ted lit 1 to ittuiu t(> co-habuatiou, an<i went to Scotland in .) une, 1087, w hete !-'ie 1 eluded to ,-ci 1 him 01 to let him ~ee hiv- child. Tho->e .uethelact^ hetoic me on the pctilionei > own e\idonee, 1 nui^t, .^a\ that. J etiliiel\ tail to -ci in wlud the de~-eition eon-«-i»t- i/j) to Jul» . 1876, it 1-- adniiiicil >>\ pctilionti lint ihouuh the le^pouuent had gone to New Ze<ilaißl whilst to Adelaide, tint. \\.i>- 1») mutual anangement Dut, it \\a- aigued on beliad ot the petMonei, that the deceit ion ( aiiinu iK't u on the Zath Jul}, 1570, %\hm he w lute to hei oideimg liei to go homo to Scotland to lici ti lends-, d\\d oileimg in that ea-e to pioMitehei pa-?age and allow hei 175 pel annum. iiad >^he lor two }eai^ pei'-i^tcnt ljs ichi-ed to comply with his outei and t-o accept hi- ollei, and deiuanded that she should bo allowed to ictuin to co-habitation, w hich iie leiu&ed to allow, then 1 think that [)Oh-ibly dcbCition might be lnleued. Hut when, betorc the e\[>nationot two )eais, she accepted his, otler, and complied with his leque&t, however unwillingly, 1 must come to the conclusion th it the separation which then took place was by mutual consent, and vowing" shew ould ne'er consent, consented still, the doctrine laid down by Loid I'en/ance in Fit/geiald Fit/Gerald L.ll. 1 L\ and D. 694, then becon cs applicable, that "If the state ol co-hubilation has ancady *eased to exist, whethei by the ach cisc act ot the huoband 01 wiie, or b> lnuiual consent ot both, 1 deseinon ' becomes liom that moment 1111-pos-ible to either, at least until their common lite and home ha\e been lesumed. In the meantime, eitlu r part\ may hu\c the light to call upon the oth 1 to resume bheii conjugal lelations, and, if refused, to enlorce f li(i lesump ion : but such refusal can-not-constitute the ollcncc intended by the statute uiuiei the rame of desertion without c.i use.' Ln the ptcseut case, there ha\ing been no lesumption ot co-hubit tion atlei tlu-ir voluntaiy sepaiation, there can be no deseition. Tho lotn^al ot the ie.spondent to continue his allowance when tlie petitioner refused to give up the child to 'him cannot constitute 'desertion.' The petition is iheieioie dismissed, but, under the ciicumstances, withotu costs. "