Divorce Court.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XLVII, Issue 7937, 28 September 1905, Page 2

Divorce Court.

A TALK OF DttSEimOiV. M the Supreme Court at New Plymouth „n Wednesday, 'before his lionour the Chief Justice (Sir Robert S'outl, a ease was heard in which *giies Rogers petitioned for divorce lrr.m her hus-baml, Ambrose Rogers (("■cymout'h). Messrs O. Samuel and •i. 11. mm ham appeared f„r the petitioner. 'Micro was no appearance of tn« rwpomJcut. I

I Mr Samuel explained the facts of ' the case at length. | Petitioner gave evidence that she 1 was man-ied to the respondent (a lih ; bourer) j n l«yo at Napier. She was , eighteen! years ot age at the time. 1 She went lo live with her mother,as her husf.and had no home, of his own. I Iwo months after the marriage 'a child was horn. Hefore. its -birth her husband, who had made a practice Oi paying her a visit, once or twice a week, ceased his visits and ; petitioner learned that ho had gone to Creymouth. She wrote him an affectionate letter but received no ivply. Subsequent !y she eMervd service, and her -baby was adopted by an Auckland lady. In 180-1 witness, received a proposal of marriage from! a man named Walker, but explained the circumstances. She con .suited a« lawyer and was informed that she could not obtain atlivorce from her husband for desertion. As sufficient time had not elapsed. Some, time later Walker again pivsstd his suit, and, despairing of getting a divorcei witness in 1890 agreed live withOiinj as man and wife. She went to Auckland where she had since cohabited with. him. and borne him two ehil« dren. Karly this year witness was on a visit to lu-r sister at Napier, when her husband unexpectedly presented himself, to her 'dismay. Witness had not heard from him since he went to Creymouth, and had not known whether he was alive or dead. He had never contributed 'in any way to her support. On the occasion of tho unexpected meeting witness told her husband what had occurred. and| it was understood that he would not defend an 'action for divorce. Since that time witness, on counsel's advice, had lived apart from Walker in order to institute divorce proceedings against her husband. There had been no collusion in the matter, ami Walker was not paying the legal expenses. The case was adjourned to the following day, as his .Honour desired formal corroborative evidence.