SUPREME COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LI, Issue 164, 2 July 1908, Page 4

SUPREME COURT.

NEW PLYMOUTH, JULY 1,

(Before Mr. Justice Edwards.)

MOKAU LAND. His Honor heard an application by Joshua Jones, of Mokau, settler, for the extension of a caveat under the Land Transfer Act to prevent the registration of a mortgage by a sub-lessee of laud included in the caveat. Mr. li. C. Hughes appealed [or the applicant, Mr. Seliars (of Huwcia) for the sub-lessee Andrew Kellv. and for the mortgagee, Adam Hannah; and Mr. Kerr for the District Land Registrar, New Plymouth. After hearing argument, his L'o:.'>r dismissed I lie application with xo hj, costs to the mortgagee and Xi is costs to the District Land Kegistrar. APPEAL. The ease of John Poster AlcOrcgor v. the I'ihama Co operative Dairy Company, an appeal aginst the decision of the' District Court at llawera, came on during the afternoon. The respondent objected that insullicieut notice had been given, ami the appeal was dismissed. Mr. Hutchen appeared for appellant.

L\ J.UVORCK. Hugh r'rnscr McDonald (petitioner) v. Annie -M:\rinn .McDonald (respondent) anil Charles Christie (co-respumlcnt). Mr. Tliinnsoii. of Inglewood, for tin; petition ll !'. There was no appearance of the other parlies, '.this had been adjourned from tin'' previous m-asioiis j»\viiyr to insufficient notice having been given to '.lit' respondents. " The petitioner deposed that lie was a fanner at, Ohura. lie married the re- . spondent in Chris'.church. After tin' marriage tlii'.v lived in variuus parts of | tin- Dominion, eveniually scttlicg in Uhura. Three children had been bora of the marriage. lie knew the corespondent, whom hy l'"' 1 i" ,lis ""'I' I ".''' ut nhnra for about 15 nionths. A lew ! His before Christie left he (eu- ! respondent) wib giving presents to reI spondent. Witness objected, and there ! was a scene-a seull'le, a light between ; petitioner and co-respondent. Tie- corespondent took him by the throat and I threw him. putting his foot upon pefi-

tinner's chest. Co-respondent, then eaiHit two of petitioner's horses, and rode away, that night. Mrs. M.-Doiiald accompanying him and taking, the baby with her.' T'liese two went to Ongaiuhe. The next he heard concerning his wife was from her mother, who informed him she was living at lluulerville. lie afterwards heard of her ill Wellington. H|e next- saw her on June lath in Brown's bush, about six miles out of Inglewood. There Kert' no houses near the one where he saw her. He demanded his child. Christie, the co-respondent, was therf; They were living in a oneroomed whare, about lift, by 1-tl't.. He saw the interior, but could see no sleeping accommodation other than a bed •■utter a fashion,'' composed of a few boards nailed together. Their rugs were (hen hanging oii the Hue outside. Petitioner at this time was accompanied by a man named Marsh.- He received custody of the child that day. From the 1i,,,', she left him on March il-l, KNIT, he had not lived with her. i His Honor: Did you speak to her when you saw her in the bushV

No, your Honor. His Honor: Curious man, I si -ay. When you got your child, didn't you speak to her then* No, not a word. Well, von arc a curious man. Thomas Marsh, a iiighl-watchiuaii livin.f in Inglewood. gave evidence concerning his visit with the .petitioner to a hut in Brown's bush, the object being to .rel McDonald's child, found respondcnTaiid eo-re-pondent living in 'he hut. with the child. There was no lloor in

the hut. and scarcely any furniture onlv a bed and a few boxes. Ilc-moml-iil admitled being McDonald's wife. His Honor: How do you know they Here living together; I Witness: If was (piile evident. I Hi., Iloiioi: How? Did you ask le-r. I Witness: -No. | His Honor: Was anything -aid'.' j Witness: No. His Honor: .Most, cslraordiiiai-y -el ot people I ever heard of. Witness (hen slated that he asked Hi.woman it' she were Airs. McDonald. She said she was. lie then asked if she would give Ihe child up to its father, and she complied. I V. C. Ileniiett deposed that in May j lasl Ihe i-es| lent ami eo-resp.,ndenl I ami a child staved with him al his Ingle- | wood Coll'ec Palace f,.r three days and I nights, occitpvillg tin: same room, as I .Mr. and Mr-. Christie and child. In August the pair stayed ill. the hulls.again, giving Hie same names, lull they had no child with thi'in then. I T. Kawlinson. of Inglewood. cnglnodriver for 11. I'.rown & Co.. at Inglewood. said he knew the parlies to this suit as Mr. and Mrs. Christie, lie mei them first at Inglewood on May iind of last year, and look thorn up io Hie bush lo a onerooined whare. They lived there lill November iSlh a- man ami wile. A decree nisi was granted, lo be moved absolute in three nion.'lis, costs I against the co-respondent on the lowest.

piarles N. Smith v. Lydia Smith (respondent) and .lames Franks, or lirophy (eo-respomlentl. Petition for dissolution of marriage. Air. T. S. Wcsiun. and with him .Mr. (. 11. Weston, for Hie pelitiuner.

Counsel said tliis was a sad case hi ils-way. Tlif petitioner nmiiiiil in ISIIO. at Wellington, and In- anil Iris wife had lived fairly comfortably nulil <.( late .-In l complained that lie' was not bringill" in as much mouev as lie might reasonably earn. They settled in Waitar.i. and his wife kept a hoarding-hou.sc, the petitioner earning what lie could in vari\ous ways. His wife was a strollminded woman, who evidently wauled to run (lie whole show, and eventually petitioner had to go. Soon afterwards he heai'd that, his wife had gone astray anil was living with another man, lie ri'ii stvaled with her. hut -lie openlv admitted the fact. Clarence I'. Davov. elerk with Messrs. Weston & Weston, proved service of '"« I"' 1 "' Unjis upon respondent and corespondent. Mrs. Smith admitted she was living with ISrophv. and that Smith had loft. She also said that she hadmf received enough money from Smith, and she wanted the divorce. She repeated this latter statement later. Iml said she wanted custodv of the children. The petitioner, Charles X. Smith, stated that, there had I>cen six children horn of (lie marriage. Four were now living at Waitara with their mother and a man known by the naincs of ITauks. llrophy. and Tanner— he didn't know what hi- ,-eal name was. lie received sonic communication from .Mr. Towiiscnd. solicitor at Waitara, instructed liy 3lrs. Snfilh. threatening him wilh proccoding, under the Married Persons Separation Act unless he would si-ii a -eparatiou agreement ami pay costs of it. lie had given all his earnings to his wife, and also helped at the bonrdin": 1 -'• I''' l''l'l- l-iler he heard of 111.' »>"r i" "hid, his will, was livin". and (iiM-d her wilh il. She admitted ■'■»■ wa- livin- wilh liropliy. and that lie was keeping her. She h.1.l left (he Raiding liou-e. and was living in a col'■'K" «iH' Hi respondent. II" asked for Cll.-lodv of IhVce of (he children. There wa.. an iiifani. hut lhat wa- ~„| h'<-. and J». had not referred („ j ( ;„ Ihe petition, Wiih.illt asking for fun;,,.,, evidence. '"- II »r made a decree nisi. |„ |„. made absolute in three month-.. „-i;h costs against Ihe c U iv-poudcllt uponllie lowest scale. .Tames Arliuir I'nlpili (Mr. Wright) sought dissolution of his marriage wbh Florence Mnv Ciilpill. 'n„. ,„.( ii ii.n.-c a saddler now livin- at lliiunvlhorpe, produced the corlilioatc of his'marria-e al Xcw rivmoulli on November Slh "hs'.l? After marriage Ihcy lived logclhci- al New Plymouth, where lie was then carrying on business, until f'Vbruarc, l!)nl. Two children were born of (lie nnirriaji'e. and the respondent, had enstody of the.-e. In May, Will, tile respondent went to Auckland. On bcr return, he left her in the house one

nioi-niiifr. and wli<m lie eanie linine from | work he lon,id she was across Ihe road iil'lii'i- niollier's with I lie ehihlre,,. He went across. She said she was aware nf ii cvnversaiion between him and another w.minn in Hie slrccl. He asked lier 11 explain, hut she refused. Tie pressed his ninthcr-in-law- for details, and she -lye them. He had said to n woman (a neighbour). " Ymi niighl come over and keen house for inc. as I'm a fjrass widower for a day .„■ two." ll was said onlv in n ink.'. Then this woman askcd'liim r.dl.nvim: Sinidav at in

Decree nisi, to be made absolute at the ■ expiration of three months, his Honor remarking that there was nothing alleged against the character of the respondent; in fact, quite to I lie contrary.