CLERIC SEEKS DIVORCE.

Taranaki Daily News, 23 July 1921, Page 9

CLERIC SEEKS DIVORCE.

THREE YEARS’ SEPARATION.

COMMENTS BY THE JUDGE. Christchurch, July 13. In the Supreme Court to-day. Mr. Justice Herdman, Arthur Reginald Suter Holloway, of Timaru, petitioned for a divorce from Florence Ettio Holloway, of Remuera, Auckland, under the amendment made last year, which provides for decrees in cases where the parties have been separated under an order of the Magistrate’s Court for three years and upwards. The petitioner is a clergyman in the Anglican Church. He is not engaged in church work at present, but is an instructor in agriculture in South Canterbury under the Canterbury Education Board. There are three children of the marriage. Mr. O. T. J. Alpers, who appeared for the petitioner, said the separation and maintenance order against petitioner was issued by . the magistrate in Nelson. The petitioner relied in part on the judgment given under the clause a few days ago by Mr. Justice Salmond. That judgment decided nothing as to the discretion to be exercised bv this Court.

I The petitioner, in his evidence, said he j had not touched church work since his wife obtained the separation order, but still was in orders. He was married in September, 1904, in Nelson. Re had been curate there, vicar at Little River, and had been at Marlborough Sounds. His wife went to stay with her parents apparently on a visit. The next thing he heard was that a separation order had been issued against against him. At one time he was temporarily farming in Nelson, having a spell, as he had been run down. He allowed the order to go by default because he was in the church and on account of his family, and because he would have to start at bedrock again.

After hearing evidence and argument Mr. Justice Herdman said: “It is impossible for me to come to the conclujsion that the magistrate did not have [some grounds for making the order. The ; question is whether I should grant relief to a.man who ha. 4 led another Court to believe he was guilty of the behavior to his wife described. Supposing it was a fact. Has a man a right to come into a Court and say, ‘I ■ have, been a brute towards my wife, and as a result of my cruelty we have been separated for three yeans and now I ask for divorce?’”

Mr. Alpers: Mr. Justice Salmond, according to his judgment, would grant a divorce even in that case. I His Honor: Take the statute as it stands. A man might be the greatest j blackguard in the country towards his wife. They are separated. His conduct ■ns responsible for the separation. Yet under the statute he can oome into Court and petition for divorce.

Mr. Alpers: Yes, that is the length to which the statute goes. The Judge rsaid he would consider the petition.