Divorce Proceedings.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XLVII, Issue 7854, 21 June 1905, Page 2

Divorce Proceedings.

A TALE OF NEGLECT AND DESERTION.

At tho Supreme Court on Tuesday, before Mr Justice Edwards, a young woman named Flora Elizabeth Urown, of Eltham, sought a dissolution 0 f her marriage with George Brown, residing at Gisborne. Mr Crump, of Eltham, appeared for the petitioner, and there was no appearance on behalf of respondent, The petition alleged cruelty, desertion and adultery on the part of tho respondent.

The petitioner,' who appoared very weak and ill, gavo her evidence in tfcrely aud&ile tones, (though admonished to speak up. Sho had not proceeded very far with her story when she collapsed and »ank in u (ami.

Mr Crump explained that she had been in bad health for some time, ajid her nervous system seemed shattered, His Honour said he was sorry thut Petitionee had been dragged to Court as Bhe W|Bs obviously not in a state to give evidence. Could not the case have been proved some other way ? Tho petitioner was excused from further examination. Tbe remainder of the story was elicited from her mother, Mrs Miller.

The evidence was 1 to the effect that tlis parties wero married at Manaiu on Jan. 14, 1893. Brown and his wife lived with the latter's mother ut Eltharn for about twelve months, and then resided in an adjoining cottage for a few months. During this time the respondent made admissions concerning a woman named Carter. His Honour aaid that as man and wife had lived together after this, it would be better to Confine the cvitienco to the desertion* The respondent, who 'had worked as a bullock-driver, the evidence continued, went to Auckland district, and sent no word for three months. His wife wrote to him for money* but he replied that he had none to give her. She raised sufficient money and rejoined him at Fapetoitoi, where they lived for some time. Here he ill-treated her, on one occasion shaking her till she fainted. 1 He treated her illness with indifference, and elie was obliged to enter the Auckland Hospital, her husband paying nothing for her maintenance whilst ' in that institution. The mother paid a second visit, to take her home from the hospital* She told Brown tihat his wife was in a very bod state and ho replied that "he wished to God she had died in the hospital." He refused her the luxuries the doctor had ordered, and allowed her no money to keep herself reasonably clothed. He kept her in a state of norvous apprehension, and went out overy evening with; the explanation that h'n "was going to see the girls." As respondent's conduct showed 110 improvement, Mrs Miller took her daughter, away to Mercury Bay in 1897, subsequently taking her bacK to Eltham, where she had resided ever since. Petitioner's health rtid not permit of her working, and since her marriage, which took place at a very youthful age, she has been subject to fits. There Were two children as issue of the ma'rriuge, born in July, 1905, and January, 1897. Mrs Miller had now possession of one child, and the othor was (n the keeping of respondent's mother. Respondent had not provided any maintenance money since his wife left l'aiwtoitkii, nor had he communicated with her Since September, 1898. In one letter (produced) he said : ["Remember you aro a married woman 1 till you get a divorce from me. . .

I have Had (quite enough of you a nd don't want to have, anything more to, do with yo,u."' In a case heard at Elth'iun, in which the potitioncr sued for inaiiiterwncc. the respondent) then admitted living with a woman named Carter, saying that "one woman was quite enough for him." 'l'ho case on that occasion was dismissed.

His Hbnont 1 granted a decree nisi. Hut ordered that it be not issued until proof of service on the respondent at (Jisbornc was liled. Costs Ml the higher were allowed tho petitioner.

In reply to, Mp Crump. His Honour said that no application for the custody of the children could bo entertained '.intil the decree nisi was made absolute.