SHORT SKIRT DIVORCE.

Taranaki Daily News, 3 June 1922, Page 11

SHORT SKIRT DIVORCE.

VIENNESE COUPLE PARTED. Austrian husbands—and wives—have to be careful what terms they use in a domestic controversy. For insulting words, or expressions “wounding to the emotions,” constitute a ground for divorce. Under this code the wife of a Civil servant brought an action against her husband. She wanted the marriage dissolved because her husband had complained that her dresses were too short, coupled with the “wounding” suggestion that she wanted to attract admiring attention. The wife admitted that her dresses were slightly skimpy, but told the Court that the fault was her husband’s. He wouldn’t provide her with funds for new gowns, so she had to wear those dating from her younger days. Anyhow, she added, short dresses weren’t synonymous with a coquettish disposition. Lots of people wore them so as to be economical in the use of materials. In defence, the husband was sure the Court realised that the salary of a Civil servant in Vienna was utterly inadequate to buy new dresses for his wife. “But that doesn’t compel the wife,” lie added, “to choose from her old clothes the very shortest dresses and the thinnest of stockings. My wife could have worn the longer ones, even if they were not so beautiful. Anyhow, a wife has not got to please anybody hut her husband.” Several witnesses were called. Female dependents were unanimous that the dresses were too short; to which the wife replied that they said so because they were all married. Male witnesses were equally unanimous that the dresses were not the least immodest — “because,” asid the husband, “all these witnesses are bachelors.” Apart from this controversy, the husband complained that, so far as “wounded feelings” were concerned, it wa s “six of one and half a dozen of the other.” . The Court took the same view. They granted the divorce on the ground of “mutually wounding expressions and accusations,” both parties being to blame for the ‘■impossible relations existing.”