No corrections yet
CONTESTED DIVORCE SUIT.
Mr. Justice Lowe, in the Third Civil Court, is hearing a contested divorce pell
tion It occupied the greater portion of the time allotted to divorce last week, and remained patt heard Petitioner is Wil
ham Denholm Hempel, igcd 34 )cars, of Wattle Valle) road, Canterbur), salesman, and respondent is Annie Maio Hempel, aged 44 jcars, of Witlle Valley toad, Canter- bur) The ground of the petition is mis conduct Donald Camelon of High street, St Kilda, former]) an hotclkeopcr, is joined as co-respondent Mr Hudson (in structed b) Messrs Abbott, Beckett, Still man, and Gia)) is appearing foi petitioner, Mr Shelton (instructed by Mr H H Hoare) is appearing for the respondent and Mr L S Wooli (instructed b) Messrs
Pavcy, Wilson, and Cohen) is appearing
for the co respondent
The luairiage took place on June 2 1914 at Malvern There are two children of the marriage The respondent w os a w idow at the time of her marriage to Hempel
Petitioner, ni his uthdivit in support of the petition said that ho was bom at St Kilda. His wife was born at Da)les foid Previous to his miniate and up to 1923, he was cmplo)cd as a salcsmm in Alelbourne liom 1923 to 1920 he was cmplovcd as a waiehousc mana ger He and his wife bad lived at Cantcrbuiy for seven )oais Until lebiu arj l8 1928 with the exception of a few domestic quarrels he and his wife had lived fairly happily On that dite respond ent w ith petitioner s brothci (Mr A L. Hempel) and his wife (Mis Alice Hempel)
went to S)dnev for a holiday of three weeks About March 7 1928 a few davs before his wife should have returned to Melbourne be received i letter from hot statiug that she intended to go to Bowen with Mis Alice Hempel He vi as ver) an no) cd at respondent proposing to stay away lonter from their nome an 1 children, and also because his wife knew that he was pressed for money and could not af ford to send her more money His wife had arranged for their children to be cal ed
for by a Mis. Maloney, lu consequence of infoiniation which he received he went to Sydney, lenving .Melbourne on April 15, 192S. On Wednesday evening, April l8 with one G. fC Shannon, ho kept Dun- gowan'Flats,'whole the respondent was staying nt 'Manly, under oTiservatidn from a quarter past. 7 o'clock until a quarter past 0 o'clock. " The co-respondent was in
Mrs. Hempel denies misconduct, and al- leges that during the marriage petitioner waB guilty of cruelty towards her. She asks that the petition be rejected, and that she be given the custody of the childi cn.
Cameron also denies: misconduct.
In her particulars of the crueltv alleged Mrs. Hempel said that while .they wero living in Wave street, Hampton, her hus- band threatened to attack with a cricket bat Albert Martin Sutton, her eldest son by her previous marriage. After peti- tioner's return from a trip to England he on several occasions, at Canterbury quar- relled with her because she would not yield to his demands that she should sell her shares in Button's Pty. Ltd., and lot hin have the money.
The case for the respondent had not closed when the Court adjourned.