Below also see: McKay v. McKay – Divorce, 1910, 1911
The Daily Telegraph, Fri 1 Dec 1905 1
QUARTER SESSIONS.
————
(Before Judge Docker.)
Mr Herbert Harris prosecuted for the Crown.
…
TWO CONVICTIONS.
…
George William McKay was convicted on a charge of indecency, and was sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment in Grafton gaol, with hard labor.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Sydney Morning Herald, Fri 1 Dec 1905 2
QUARTER SESSIONS.
(Before Judge Docker and juries of 12.)
…
ASSAULT.
George William McKay pleaded not guilty to a charge of having assaulted Percy [or Percival Charles] Williams on November 12. He was convicted and sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment in Grafton gaol.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
George William McKay, Gaol photo sheet 3
![SRNSW: NRS2138, [3/6070], Darlinghurst Gaol photographic description book, 1904-1905, No. 9921, p. 396, R5111.](../../images/trials/1905-McKay-6070-gaol-photo-9921.jpg "SRNSW: NRS2138, [3/6070], Darlinghurst Gaol photographic description book, 1904-1905, No. 9921, p. 396, R5111.") |
Gaol Photo Sheet - Transcribed Details
No. 9921
05-5372
Date when Portrait was taken: 30-11-1905
Name: George William McKay
|
Native place: Miller’s Point Year of birth: 3-7-1861 Arrived Ship: Trade or occupation Religion: C of England Education, degree of: read & write Height: 5' 1" Weight On committal: 123 Colour of hair: Dark brown Colour of eyes: Brown |
Marks or special features: Minus one tooth from upper + 2 teeth from lower jaw. White patches on right side and back of neck. Bridge of nose prominent. Left collarbone protrudes. Pale mole on left side of body in line with elbow. Brown mole on left shoulder blade. Ruptured in testicles scar on right knee. |
|
(No. of previous Portrait ... ) CONVICTIONS |
|||||
| Where and When | Offence. | Sentence | |||
|
Sydney Q.S |
30 |
11 |
1905 |
Indecent assault on a male person |
12 months HL. |
McKay v. McKay divorce, 1910
McKay v. McKay divorce papers 1910 4
1
Photo: Peter de Waal
No. ----
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NSW
MATRIMONIAL CAUSES JURISDICTION }
To the Honourable Alexander Gordon Judge of the Matrimonial Causes Court.
In re Annie McKay (formerly Ramsden) of 66 Buckingham Street Redfern near Sydney in the State of New South Wales General Servant And George McKay of York Street Sydney aforesaid Brush and Folder her husband.
The Thirteenth day of May 1910.
The Petition of Annie McKay,
SHOWETH:–
1. That your Petitioner was on the twenty-eighth day of December One thousand eight hundred and ninety two lawfully married to George McKay at Newtown according to the Rites of the Church of England.
2. That your Petitioner was born at Lancashire England and is at the present time and was at the time of the institution of this suit and has been for three years and upwards domiciled in the State of New South Wales. That your Petitioner’s husband was born at Millers Point Sydney in the State of New South Wales.
3. That your Petitioner and her said husband have had issue of their said marriage Two children to wit: Florence McKay sixteen years of age and Leslie McKay six months since deceased.
4. That your Petitioner’s said husband has without just cause or excuse wilfully deserted your Petitioner and without any such cause or excuse left her continuously so deserted during three years and upwards.
5. That your Petitioner’s said husband has during three years and upwards been an habitual drunkard and habitually left your Petitioner without the means of support.
YOUR PETITIONER THEREFORE HUMBLY PRAYS :
1. That your Honor will be pleased to Decree that the marriage of your Petitioner with her husband be dissolved.
2. That the custody of the child Florence McKay be granted unto your said Petitioner.
3. That your Petitioner may have such further and other relief in the premises as to your Honor may seem meet.
[Signed] Annie McKay
NOTE:– This Petition is filed by Leopold Benjamin Bertram of 6 Rowe Street Sydney in the State of New South Wales Solicitor for Annie McKay of 66 Buckingham Street Redfern near Sydney aforesaid the above-named Petitioner.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
2a
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF
NEW SOUTH WALES
MATRIMONIAL CAUSES JURISDICTION
No. 7308
|
McKAY v. McKAY |
Affidavit of |
SWORN the 13th day of May, 1910.
LB Bertram,
Solicitor of Petitioner,
6 Rose Street,
SYDNEY.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
2b
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NSW
MATRIMONIAL CAUSES JURISDICTION }
No. ----
BETWEEN
ANNIE McKAY
Petitioner
And
GEORGE McKAY
Respondent
On this thirteenth day of May in the year One thousand nine hundred and ten Annie McKay of 66 Buckingham Street Redfern near Sydney in the State of New South Wales General Servant being duly sworn makes oath and says as follows:–
1. I am the above-named Petitioner.
2. I was married to the Respondent on the twenty-eighth day of December One thousand eight hundred and ninety two at Newtown near Sydney aforesaid according to the Rites of the Church of England.
3. I was born at Lancashire England and am at the present time and was at the time of the institution of this suit and have been for three years and upwards domiciled in the said State of New South Wales.
4. The Respondent was born at Millers Point near Sydney aforesaid.
5. There has been issue of my said marriage with the Respondent two children to wit: Florence McKay sixteen years of age and Leslie McKay six months since deceased.
6. The Respondent has without just cause or excuse wilfully deserted me and without any such cause or excuse left.
[Signed] Annie McKay
[Signature illegible]
A Commissioner for Affidavits
Sworn 13 May 1910
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
me continuously so deserted during three years and upwards.
7. The Respondent has during three years and upwards been an habitual drunkard and habitually left me without the means of support.
8. There is no collusion or connivance existing between myself and the Respondent.
SWORN by the Deponent on the day first above-mentioned at Sydney before me:–
[Signed] Annie McKay
[Signature illegible]
A Commissioner for Affidavits
Sworn 13th May 1910
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
3a
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 7308
|
McKAY v. McKAY |
APPEARANCE |
Edward RM Newton.
Solicitor for Respondent,
135 King Street,
Sydney.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
3b
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction }
No. 7308
|
Annie McKAY v. George McKAY |
|
Dated this twenty sixth day of May One thousand nine hundred and ten
[Signed] Edward Rowley Morris Newton
Solicitor for Respondent,
135 King Street, Sydney.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
4a
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 7308
|
McKAY v. McKAY |
AFFIDAVIT OF RESPONDENT IN
|
Sworn 1st day of June 1910
Edward RM Newton,
Respondent’s Solicitor,
135 King Street,
Sydney.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
4b
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction }
No. 7308
Between
Annie McKAY
Petitioner
And
George McKAY
Respondent
On this first day of June in the year of our Lord One thousand nine hundred and ten George McKay of No. 96 Brougham Street Darlinghurst near Sydney in the State of New South Wales Brusher and Folder being duly sworn maketh oath and saith as follows:–
1. I am the abovenamed Respondent.
2. I admit the statements contained in paragraphs one two and three of the Petition filed herein.
3. I deny that I have without just cause or excuse wilfully deserted my wife and without any such cause or excuse left her continuously so deserted during three years and upwards.
4. I deny that I have been during three years and upwards been an habitual drunkard and habitually left my wife.
[Signature illegible] JP
[Signed] Geo McKay
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
without the means of support.
5. I say that my wife has without just cause or excuse wilfully deserted me and without any such cause or excuse left me continuously so deserted during three years and upwards.
6. I verily believe that my wife between the First day of August One thousand eight hundred and ninety three and the Thirty first day of December One thousand nine hundred and eight committed Adultery with one James Lemm at Number 133 Cathedral Street (then Woolloomooloo Street) Sydney and various other places with in the State of New South Wales.
7. There is no collusion or connivance direct or indirect past or present between me and my wife the said Respondent or the said James Lemm.
[Signed] Geo McKay
Sworn by the Deponent on the day first above mentioned at Sydney Before me
[Signature illegible] JP
Sworn before me this 1st June 1910
[Signature illegible] JP
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
5a
In The Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 7308
|
McKAY v. McKAY |
ANSWER |
Edward RM Newton,
Respondent’s Solicitor
135 King Street,
Sydney.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
5b
In The Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction }
No. 7308
BETWEEN
ANNIE McKAY
PETITIONER
And
GEORGE McKAY
RESPONDENT
Wednesday the First day of June in the year of our Lord One thousand nine hundred and ten
The Respondent George McKay by Edward Rowley Morris Newton his solicitor in answer to the said Petition filed in this cause Saith:–
1. That he admits the statements contained in paragraphs one two and three of the said Petition.
2. That he denies that he has without just cause or excuse wilfully deserted the Petitioner and without any such cause or excuse left her continuously so deserted during three years and upwards.
3. That he denies that he has during three years and upwards been an habitual drunkard and has habitually left the Petitioner without the means of support.
4. And the Respondent further saith that the Respondent Petitioner has without just cause or excuse wilfully deserted the Respondent and without any such cause or excuse left him continuously so deserted during three years and upwards.
[Signed] Geo McKay
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
5. And the Respondent also further saith that between the First day of August One thousand nine hundred and three and the Thirty first day of December One thousand nine hundred and eight the said Petitioner committed Adultery with one James Lemm at No 133 Cathedral Street (then Woolloomooloo Street) Sydney and various other places within the State of New South Wales.
Wherefore the Respondent humbly prays
(1) That your Honor will be pleased to reject the prayer of the said Petitioner.
(2) That your Honor will be pleased to decree that the marriage of the Respondent with the Petitioner be dissolved.
(3) That the Respondent may have the custody of the child the issue of said marriage.
(4) That the Respondent may have such further and other relief in the premises as to your Honor may seem meet.
[Signed] Geo McKay
Note:– This Answer is filed by Edward Rowley Morris Newton of 135 King Street Sydney Solicitor for the abovenamed Respondent.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
6a
In The Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 7308
|
McKAY v. McKAY |
REPLY |
LB Bertram.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
6b
In The Supreme Court of
New South Wales
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 7308
BETWEEN
ANNIE McKAY
Petitioner
And
GEORGE McKAY
Respondent
The Twentieth day of June July in the year of our Lord One thousand nine hundred and ten eleven
The Petitioner Annie McKay by her Solicitor Leopold Benjamin Bertram in reply to the answer of the Respondent to the Petition filed herein in this cause saith:
1. That the Petitioner denies that she has without just cause or excuse wilfully deserted the Respondent and without any such cause or excuse left him continuously so deserted during three years and upwards as set out in the fourth Paragraph of the said answer.
2. That the Petitioner denies that between the first day of August One thousand nine hundred and three and the thirty-first day of December one thousand nine hundred and eight she committed adultery with one James Lemm at No 133 Cathedral Street (then Woolloomooloo Street) Sydney and various other places in the State of New South Wales as set out in the fifth paragraph of the said Answer or at all.
WHEREUPON THE PETITIONER HUMBLY PRAYS:
1. That your Honor will be pleased to grant the prayers of the said Petitioner.
2. That your Honor will be pleased to reject the prayers of the said Respondent.
[Signed] LB Bertram
Petitioner’s Solicitor,
6 Rowe Street, SYDNEY.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
7a
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF
NEW SOUTH WALES
MATRIMONIAL CAUSES JURISDICTION
No. 7308
|
McKAY v. McKAY |
ISSUES |
LB Bertram.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
7b
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NSW
MATRIMONIAL CAUSES JURISDICTION }
No. 7308
ANNIE McKAY
Against
GEORGE McKAY
QUESTIONS FOR THE JUDGE
On behalf of the Petitioner.
1. Whether Annie McKay the Petitioner was married to George McKay the Respondent on the 28th of December 1892.
2. Whether the Respondent has without just cause or excuse wilfully deserted the Petitioner and without any such cause or excuse left her continuously so deserted during three years and upwards.
3. Whether the Respondent has during three years and upwards has been an habitual drunkard and has habitually left the Petitioner without the means of support.
On behalf of the Respondent.
4. 5. Whether the Petitioner has without just cause or
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
excuse wilfully deserted the Respondent and without any such cause or excuse left him continuously so deserted during three years and upwards.
5. 4. Whether the Petitioner between the 1st of August 1903 and the 31st of December 1908 committed adultery with one James Lemm at No. 133 Cathedral Street Sydney and at other places in the State of New South Wales.
Settled as altered
[Signed] Arthur G Saddington
Deputy Registrar, 9/8/11
Issues to be tried at Sydney next Sittings [Initialled] AGS, 9/8/11
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
8a
25 November, 2011
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 7308
|
McKAY v. McKAY |
ISSUES. |
Cor: Gordon, J 22/9/11 Stand over November Sittings [Initialled] WKSM
Cor: Gordon J, 4.12.11
Petition & subsequent proceedings to be amended as to Petitioner’s & Respondent’s names.
Both petitions dismissed.
No order as to costs.
[Initialled] WKSM
LB Bertram.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
8b
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 7308
Annie McKay
against
George McKay
Questions for the Judge
On behalf of the Petitioner
1. Whether Annie McKay the Petitioner was married to George McKay the Respondent on the 28th of December, 1892.
2. Whether the Respondent has without just cause or excuse wilfully deserted the Petitioner and without any such cause or excuse left her continuously so deserted during three years and upwards.
3. Whether the Respondent during three years and upwards has been an habitual drunkard and has habitually left the Petitioner without the means of support.
4. Whether the Petitioner between the 1st of August 1903 and the 31st of December 1908 committed adultery with one James Lemm at No. 133 Cathedral Street Sydney and at other places in the State of New South Wales.
5. Whether the Petitioner has without just cause or excuse wilfully deserted the Respondent and without any such cause or excuse left him continuously so deserted during three years and upwards.
[Signature illegible]
Registrar.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
9a
In the Supreme Court of
New South Wales
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction
No. 7308
|
McKAY v. McKAY |
Precept to enter cause for trial |
LB Bertram
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
9b
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction }
No. 7308
Between
Annie McKay
Petitioner
and
Gorge McKay
Respondent
Please enter this cause for trial at the next ensuing sittings of the Court.
Dated the 14th day of August 1911.
[Signed] LB Bertram
Solicitor for Petitioner
6 Rowe Street
Sydney.
To the Registrar.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
10a
In the Supreme Court
of New South Wales
Matrimonial Causes
Jurisdiction
No. 7308
|
McKAY v. McKAY |
Affidavit of George Mckay Respondent |
Sworn 17th day of November 1911
Edward RM Newton,
Respondent’s Solicitor,
135 King Street,
Sydney.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
10b
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction }
No. 7308
Between
Annie McKay
Petitioner
and
George McKay
Respondent
On this Seventeenth day of November in the year of our Lord One thousand nine hundred and eleven George McKay of Sydney in the State of New South Wales Brush and Folder being duly sworn maketh oath and saith as follows:–
1. I am the above mentioned Respondent.
2. My wife the above named Petitioner has filed her Petition for Divorce on the ground of Desertion. – I have filed a Defence and cross Petition on the grounds of her Desertion and that she committed Adultery with one James Lemm.
3. On Friday the Twenty second day of September last I saw and interviewed Mr August Lemm of Moore Street Sydney who is a brother of the said James Lemm. – I know and am well acquainted with the said August Lemm. – I asked him whether he could furnish me with the address of the said James Lemm. – I also told the said August Lemm the reason I wanted it. – The said August Lemm told me that the reason I wanted it. – The said August Lemm told me that he saw the said James Lemm about nine months back, and that he thought he was going to the West. – I
[Signed] Geo McKay
[Signature illegible] JP
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
asked him to let me have a letter to that effect. – He told me to write him a letter and that he would answer it in due course. I accordingly on the Twenty fourth day of September last wrote to the said August Lemm asking for the said James Lemm’s address, but received no reply. – I therefore called on him again on or about the Thirtieth day of September last and saw the said August Lemm who said in effect that it would not be fair to let me have the said James Lemm’s address. – He did not say he knew where James Lemm was.
Sworn by the Deponent on the day first above mentioned at Sydney before me.
[Signed] Geo McKay
[Signature illegible]
A Justice of the Peace for the State of New South Wales.
17th November 1911
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
11a
In the Supreme Court
of New South Wales
Matrimonial Causes
Jurisdiction
No. 7308
|
McKAY v. McKAY |
Affidavit |
Sworn 17th day of January 1911
Edward RM Newton,
Respondent’s Solicitor,
135 King Street,
Sydney.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
11b
In the Supreme Court of NSW
Matrimonial Causes Jurisdiction }
No. 7308
Between
Annie McKay
Petitioner
and
George McKay
Respondent
On this seventeenth day of November in the year of our Lord One thousand nine hundred and eleven Edward Rowley Morris Newton of Sydney in the said State of New South Wales Solicitor being duly sworn maketh oath and saith as follows:–
1. I am the Solicitor for the abovenamed Respondent and I know and am well acquainted with Frederick Lemm and Arthur Walker hereinafter referred to.
2. On or about the Twentieth day of October last I saw Mr Frederick Lemm a brother of James Lemm (named in the Answer herein) and asked him for the address of the said James Lemm. – The said Frederick Lemm said he did not know where the said James Lemm was. – I told the said Frederick Lemm that I would write to him and I also told him that I would be glad if he would reply in writing. – The said Frederick Lemm told me to address the letter to him at Marrickville where I verily believe he resides.
3. On the Twenty first day of October last I wrote a letter to the said Frederick Lemm in the words and
[Signature illegible] JP
[Signed] Edw RM Newton
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
figures following:–
Carlyle Chambers,
135 King Street,
Sydney 21st Octr, 1911.
Edward RM Newton
Solicitor
GPO Box 1685,
Telephone 841 City.
Dear Sir,
McKay and McKay.
In this Divorce Suit Mrs McKay is the Petitioner and I am acting for the Respondent husband who is defending the suit and alleges that his wife committed Adultery with your brother Mr James Lemm.
I am desirous of finding out Mr James Lemm’s address so that he may be communicated with, and given an opportunity of defending himself against the allegation.
I would be glad if you would please furnish me with any information regarding his whereabouts.
Yours truly,
Edward RM Newton.
Mr Frederick Lemm,
Contractor, Marrickville.
I received no reply to such letter, and I have not received any reply up to the time of swearing this affidavit.
4. In the month of October last I also saw and interviewed Mr Arthur Walker who is a brother-in-law of the said James Lemm and asked him for the address of the said James Lemm. – Mr Walker said he did not know the address of the said James Lemm.
Sworn by the Darlinghurst on the day first above mentioned at Sydney Before me.
[Signed] Edward RM Newton
17/11/11
[Signature illegible] JP
A Justice of the Peace for the State of New South Wales.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
12a-12b
|
McKay v McKay, ‘Respondent’s Exhibit 2’. On the reverse of the family portrait, 12a, is the following text: “Marked for identification 2 4-12-11 McKay v. McKay.” [Initialled] “WKSW - Associate Coram Gordon J 4-12-11 McKay v McKay Respondent’s Exhibit 2” [Initialled] “WKSW - Associate” |
McKay v McKay, ‘Respondent’s Exhibit 1’. On the reverse of the portrait, 12b, is the following text: “Marked for identification 14-12-11 McKay v. McKay.” [Initialled] “WKSW - Associate Coram Gordon J 4-12-11 McKay v McKay Petitioner’s Respondent’s Exhibit 1.” [Initialled] “WKSW - Associate.”
|
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
13
McKay v. McKay , 1911
Divorce court transcript Mon 4 Dec 1911 5
69
IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
IN DIVORCE
Coram: GORDON J.
Monday, 4th December, 1911.
McKAY V McKAY.
Photo: Peter de Waal
PETITIONER: (As amended) ANNIE ELIZABETH McKAY.
RESPONDENT: (As amended) GEORGE WILLIAM McKAY
MR DE LISSA appeared for the petitioner.
MR NORRIS appeared for the respondent.
————
ISSUES: (On behalf of the petitioner)
1 Marriage 28th December 1892.
2 Desertion without just cause or excuse during three years and upwards.
3 Whether the respondent during three years and upwards has been an habitual drunkard and has habitually left the petitioner without the means of support.
(On behalf of the respondent)
4 Whether the petitioner between the 1st August 1903 and the 31st December 1908 committed adultery with one James Lemm at No. 133 Cathedral Street, Sydney, and at other places in the State of New South Wales.
5 Desertion without just cause or excuse during three years and upwards.
70
PETITIONER,
sworn, examined by Mr de Lissa, deposed:
My name is Annie Elizabeth McKay. I was married on the 28th December 1892 at St Stephen’s Church of England, Newtown, to George William McKay. My maiden name was Annie Elizabeth Ramsden; I was 23 or 24 at the time of marriage.
(Registrar General Certificate of Marriage put in and marked Exhibit A).
I was born in Lancashire, England. I was about nine years old when I came here; I have lived in New South Wales ever since. Respondent was born at Miller’s Point, Sydney.
TO HIS HONOR. After marriage, up to the time we parted, we were living in and about Sydney.
TO MR DE LISSA. We first lived at North Sydney after marriage, we did not live happily there. Respondent started to drink six weeks after marriage; he was in the clothing trade, he was working on wages. He kept on drinking up to the time I left him; it is fifteen years since I left him. He used to knock me about, strike me; that would happen when he was
petitioner x
71
under the influence of drink.
We lived at North Sydney for about two years; there were two children of the marriage, one was born at North Sydney. The cruelty and drunkenness went on all the time at North Sydney. I went out on several occasions to earn my own living and to keep the child; I did anything that came: I did washing; my mother helped me. Respondent gave me a little, it was not enough to live on; he was getting three pounds a week at that time.
From North Sydney we went to Erskineville, we were living next to my father and mother there. Respondent treated me just the same. My mother used to come and see me often, and also my sister.
TO HIS HONOR. We lived at Erskineville about twelve or eighteen months.
TO MR DE LISSA. My father is dead. The second child was born at Erskineville, and it died there. My mother has kept the girl.
TO HIS HONOR. The only child living is Florence; she has been living with me and my mother.
TO MR DE LISSA. At Erskineville, I was in the wash-house one day, I had
petitioner x
72
the little child in my arms. Respondent was under the influence of drink, he used filthy language. My father came in and burst the wash-house door open; respondent had a block of wood, he was going to kill me. The child went into convulsions, it died a month after.
From Erskineville we went back to North Sydney; respondent said I would have to go back, that we lived too near my people. We went back. We did not go to the same house we were in before, we went to another house. We were there about six months; we did not get on very well at all, the same conduct went on. He put me out and told me to earn my own living about half past eleven at night; I looked for a policeman, I could not find one. I had been doing washing for other people, when respondent came home he threw it out the window. I did not go away from the house that night, I stayed there three weeks after that; he didn’t say anything more about clearing out. We did not get on at all; he told me to go, he said if I came into the house he would put me out altogether. I sent the child over to my people, she was about 8 years old, she went by herself; I went to the country.
TO HIS HONOR. I have been separated from respondent nine years.
TO MR DE LISSA. I went up country in October, I could not say what
petitioner x
73
year. I went to a situation as housemaid.
Lemm came to live with respondent and myself at North Sydney as a boarder the last time we lived there. I knew him when he was a boy. Respondent introduced him to the house.
TO HIS HONOR. I could not say what Lemm did; he was connected with the clothing trade, he was working in the same place as respondent. Lemm was at North Sydney about three weeks before I left; he was there when I left.
TO MR DE LISSA. I never misconducted myself with Lemm. There were two rooms in the house, Lemm had the back room, I had the front room with respondent. I have never seen Lemm since.
I came back to Sydney after I had been 3 years in the country, I took a situation here and have been in it ever since. I did not hear or see anything of respondent when I came back to Sydney.
TO HIS HONOR. I did not make any attempt to find him.
TO MR DE LISSA. I have never been charged with adultery by respondent until I read it in his answer.
petitioner x
74
CROSS-EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT.
TO MR NORRIS. I swear I never misconducted myself with Lemm. I never go back I have never seen him since I left North Sydney. I did not live with Lemm as his wife under the name of Mr and Mrs Wilson at 133 Cathedral Street, Woolloomooloo. He went by the name of Wilson, I did not. I took the room, he used to come there. He went by the name of Wilson Lemm; he used to say at the house his name was Wilson. That was a long time after I left North Sydney. I was in the house at 133 Cathedral Street when he used the name Wilson; he only used to come to the house, he did not live there. He did not live there as my husband. I saw Lemm at 133 Cathedral Street after I left North Sydney. When I said I had not seen Lemm since I left North Sydney I was wrong.
TO HIS HONOR. I last saw Lemm at Mrs Bayne’s, 133 Cathedral Street, I could not say when.
TO MR NORRIS. It was before I went to the country; I have been to the country twice. When I left North Sydney I went to the country for six weeks, I could not say what part of the country, I have no recollection.
petitioner x
75
TO HIS HONOR. After I left respondent I went to the country, up Deniliquin way; I was away three years.
TO MR NORRIS. I went to Gosford for six weeks, and then came back to Sydney; I went to my house at North Sydney. Respondent came in at 12 o’clock that night; and he said “You have come back.” I said, “Yes.” He said, “I will put you out if you do not go out.” He said he was going to sell up the house.
TO HIS HONOR. I was away from respondent for six weeks just before he turned me out; after he turned me out I went to the country.
TO MR NORRIS. I could not say how long after he turned me out it was that I went to the country, I have no recollection.
TO HIS HONOR. I stopped in Sydney for about three weeks before going to Deniliquin; I stopped at Mrs Bayne’s, 133 Cathedral Street.
TO MR NORRIS. During that three weeks Lemm used to come there, he gave the name of Wilson; I do not know how I knew he went under the name Wilson.
TO HIS HONOR. I heard people call him that.
petitioner x
76
TO MR NORRIS. I was talking to him a few times as a friend. He did not subsequently go to Deniliquin with me. I did not live with him in the house at Woolloomooloo as Mrs Wilson; he never went into my bedroom when I was there.
This paragraph (produced) is a photograph of Lemm.
(Photograph of James Lemm m.s.i. 1).
This photograph (produced) is a photograph of myself and my child.
(Photograph of petitioner m.s.i. 2).
Lemm did not go with me to Deniliquin, he was up there.
TO HIS HONOR. I could not say if he went in the same train with me, he might have done.
TO MR NORRIS. He did not go in the same train that I know of; he might have been in the same train, but not in the same compartment. I will swear he did not get in the compartment to get me any refreshments. He might have travelled in the same compartment. I went to Deniliquin by train and coach, via Hay. I saw Lemm on the same coach; he might
petitioner x
77
have gone up on the same train. I say he did go up in the same train, and in the same carriage. He might have been in Deniliquin for the same period of time that I was there; I saw him once while he was there. I was in Deniliquin about six months; I do not know what Lemm was doing there, I did not see him often there, I did not live in the same house there as he did, he was not working at the same place as I was. From Deniliquin I went to a station about eighty miles out of Deniliquin, McLaurin’s station, I was there from the time I came down to fleet time. I had an engagement of six months at Mrs McLaurin’s station, and finished that up, then came to Sydney. I did not see Lemm at McLaurin’s station, I did not hear of him there; I do not know where he was while I was there. Then I came back to the country, I did not go to the country after that. I was six months in one part of Deniliquin; I was in other places in the town of Deniliquin; I was in four places there. I was at a hotel, I’ve forgot the name, it was in the main street; that is the first situation, I was there six months. From there I went to Mrs McLaurin’s station; I came back to Sydney from Mrs McLaurin’s.
TO HIS HONOR. I did not come back to Sydney and go up to Deniliquin again.
petitioner x
78
TO MR NORRIS. I could not say how long I was at Deniliquin. I was in a situation at the Exchange Hotel there for twelve months, this is before I went to the other hotel and before I went to Mrs McLaurin’s. I have got references but I cannot find them at present. I was away from Sydney three years altogether.
TO HIS HONOR. I was not in any other town beside Deniliquin while I was away in the country.
TO MR NORRIS. Deniliquin is the only country town I went to. I was at Bendigo railway station one Christmas, that is in between. From Deniliquin I went to Bendigo railway station; from there I went to Mrs McLaurin’s station. I have been in different places in Sydney, I was not in one place for three years.
TO HIS HONOR. I have been in situation since I came back to Sydney earning my own living.
TO MR NORRIS. I have never lived with Lemm as his wife since I came back to Sydney; I have not seen him since I came back from the station. I saw him at Deniliquin two or three times, he was not staying at the same hotel as I was working
petitioner x
79
at. I have been doing general work at the Britannia Hotel in King Street, I have been there for over two years; I left six months ago on account of ill-health. I was not in any other situation since I came back from the country. I was doing outside work. I was living in a room at 86 Great Buckingham Street; I lived in 334 Cleveland Street, Redfern, in a room, I was going to the Britannia Hotel then; I was not living at the hotel, I was living outside all the time. I went to a situation in Buckingham Street.
I went to Wallace’s one Monday, I saw respondent; I asked him if he could give me my father’s photo.
I swear I never lived with Lemm under the name of Lemm or any other name; I swear I have never been anywhere with him. I swear I went up in the train with him, because he went up on business, he told me that. I have never seen him from that day to this. I could not say when he told me he was up there on business. I saw him a week after I went there, he went away then; he was acting as bailiff at a certain place in Deniliquin.
TO HIS HONOR. I saw him for about a week, I have never seen him since.
TO MR NORRIS. I swear I did not occupy the same room with him at
petitioner x
80
133 Cathedral Street; he used to come to the room and I borrowed money off him, I paid him back. I could not say what I borrowed off him. I never told Lemm I was living there; he took me there to have a room, it was a double room. Lemm did not put me on the train to go to Deniliquin, it was just chance that I met him on the train and coach going to Deniliquin,
Respondent has paid a little to my mother for the maintenance of the child, he does not pay regularly every week, it is only a little now and again. I would not call ten shillings or eleven shillings a week a little. I have no recollection of the year I left North Sydney. I say respondent was a drunken man; when I left him, he was working for A Walker, clothing manufacturer. By a drunkard I mean coming home every night in the week under the influence of drink; he was under the influence of drink six nights a week, and all day Sunday, he used to bring it home on Saturday afternoon. He was always under the influence of drink after he left work; I never saw the man sober.
TO HIS HONOR. He looked in a muddled state when he went to work in the morning.
TO MR NORRIS. I know he was working for Mr Walker for a long time,
petitioner x
81
I do not know how long. I know he used to have the keys of the warehouse, he left home at half-past eight; sometimes he got the half-past seven boat, not always. I know he had to open up the warehouse, he was late on several occasions; no complaints were made to me. I do not know if he locked up the warehouse in the evening, I know he carried the keys but I do not know what time he left. I do not know what he did with the keys of the warehouse.
Respondent brought Lemm home, he did not tell me that Lemm was a fellow-worker of his at Walker’s, and that Walker’s had asked him to get Lemm a bed for a few nights. Lemm was a boarder, and was to pay me 16/- a week. The bailiff was never put in that cottage. My people were in comfortable circumstances, I applied to them for food and money, they have given me money at North Sydney; they have given me food too. I left the house to go to Gosford, Lemm did not go with me, he stayed with respondent in the house. Respondent said to Lemm, “Have you seen my wife?” Lemm said, “What have I got to do with your wife?” I know that because respondent told me, Lemm did not tell me. I remember going home the night I came back from Gosford, I saw respondent there; I asked him what I was going to do;
petitioner x
82
he said, “Fetch your boxes, I will give you a few shillings to fetch your boxes back and it will be all right.” I said, “Oh no, I could not do that.” He said, “I am going to sell the home.” I said I was going to a situation; I went to a situation on a station, I could not say where it was. After I first left respondent I went to Gosford; I came back after three weeks and went to the house one night.
TO HIS HONOR. I went to Gosford to a situation but I was disappointed over it. I could not say how long I was at Gosford.
TO MR NORRIS. When respondent offered me a few shillings to get my boxes, I would not come back. He said, “You will break my heart.” I said, “Oh, it is coming home to you, is it?” He said, “For goodness sake come back.” I refused, I could not live with the man. Respondent got twelve months in gaol for a crime on Percy Williams in North Sydney, that is why I cleared to the country. I left him before that on several occasions. I went to the country to a situation since the offence was committed, I am sure of that; the offence was about two or three or four years after I left North Sydney. The disgrace of that offence drove me into the country; I went to McLaurin’s station, that was immediately after the offence occurred; that occurred
petitioner x
83
two or three years after I had left North Sydney. I say respondent did not contribute regularly to the support of the child.
After I came to the country I remember going to Walker’s; I did not ask Mr Arthur Walker for Lemm’s address.
TO HIS HONOR. I did not ask him for it at any time.
RE-EXAMINATION.
TO MR DE LISSA. My health broke down, my memory became affected; I cannot remember dates or years. When I told respondent I could not make it up, that was on account of the way he had treated me. He used to tell me he had the keys of the warehouse, but I never saw them.
When I saw respondent was under the influence of drink, I mean he was always in a muddled state, coming home and beating me.
I have been in different places in the country, I was on a station for six months, I got work in between. I left respondent on several occasions, I went to my people.
petitioner re x
84
I have references, I cannot find them. I am living at 66 Great Buckingham Street, at present; I am still at the Britannia Hotel, I have been there two years, I am a domestic there. I was away six months, they asked me to come back again. Mrs Cordingley keeps the Britannia Hotel.
Lemm lent me money, I paid him back; I was destitute at the time. When he came to the house he knew how we were situated. Respondent was working at the time but had no money because Mr Walker had failed in business.
When I left North Sydney I went straight to Gosford. Then I stayed in Cathedral Street for three weeks. I did not take the room at Mrs Bayne’s, Lemm got me the room; I was there three weeks till I got a situation. He said, “I look to you to pay me back.” I paid him back after I went to the situation, and I have never seen him from that day to this. I saw him on the coach by accident. Mrs Bayne is still living, I could not say where she is.
TO HIS HONOR. I last saw her about six years ago.
TO MR DE LISSA. I do not remember the names of any people who had rooms there. It was a large house, she had a good many
petitioner re x
85
rooms, she had no servant; I did not get any meals there, I got my own meals.
TO HIS HONOR. I never went under any name.
TO MR DE LISSA. I did not give Mrs Bayne any name, Lemm gave the name; he did not give my own name.
TO HIS HONOR. Mrs Bayne used to call me Wilson all the time I was there.
TO MR DE LISSA. One Saturday night respondent came down, I saw him, I was on the verandah talking to Mrs Bayne; I said to her, “There is my husband.” Lemm never lived there while I was there, he used to come there; I used to have a talk to him, he used to come inside; I did not go for a walk with him. He would come into the dining room, I saw him in the dining room, Mrs Bayne was there. I never had him in my bedroom.
TO MR NORRIS. When I said to Mrs Bayne “There is my husband” I was not put out of the house that night. I left of my own accord; I did not go that night.
TO HIS HONOR. Mrs Bayne always called me Wilson right to the last.
(Witness retired)
petitioner ret.
86
SARAH ANN RAMSDEN,
sworn, examined on behalf of petitioner, deposed:
TO MR DE LISSA. My name is Sarah Ann Ramsden, I am the mother of petitioner; I remember when she was married. I saw something of petitioner and respondent while they were living in North Sydney; I heard quarrels before the baby was born. Several times after the baby was born he complained he had no money to pay the nurse; I said I would find the money.
TO HIS HONOR. That is the first child.
TO MR DE LISSA. Respondent used to take too much to drink, he used to be very abusive. On Sundays I know he had had it in the house. I have not seen much of him on week nights. I have seen him ill-treat petitioner several times. I saw him ill-treat her when the baby was about three or four months old, he pulled her by her hair; he had her locked up, and she was trying to get out; he got her out, her hair was down. The baby was sick after. Respondent was half drunk then.
When they lived in Erskineville he was always growling and quarrelling; the neighbours complained. He came home
SA Ramsden x
87
drunk several times. It is a long while since I saw him; I could not say how often he came home drunk. The same thing went on as at North Sydney.
I have never known petitioner to be associated with a man named Lemm.
TO HIS HONOR. I do not know Lemm at all.
TO MR DE LISSA. I helped to support petitioner and the child when respondent was out of work. I have had the child nine years, I have schooled her and done all for her. For about two and a half years respondent has sent me money for her support on and off. The girl went to him for it until about twelve months ago; she is in business now. He used to pay 10/- sometimes, and sometimes less. He has been paying for the child the last 2½ years. He has paid me about £18 a year for the child as near as I can guess. On the 22nd October last he sent me one pound, and last week he sent me one pound.
CROSS-EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT.
TO MR NORRIS. The little girl used to go for the money; I had to rouse him up because he did not support petitioner, and I had
SA Ramsden x
88
nothing coming in, and I thought it was his duty to support the child. I used to send the child to where he worked. The girl is now in business, she earns 12/6 a week.
TO HIS HONOR. Respondent did not pay anything previous to the last two and a half years.
TO MR NORRIS. For the first 6½ years respondent knew where the child was because he used to meet her. I never asked him to pay anything during that period.
(Witness retired)
SARAH RAMSDEN,
sworn, examined on behalf of petitioner, deposed:
TO MR DE LISSA. My name is Sarah Ramsden, I am a sister of petitioner; I remember when she was married. I remember when they were living in North Sydney, I visited them there respondent treated her very cruelly. We used to have to continually keep helping them. He used to speak to her very disrespectfully; he was nearly always drunk.
TO HIS HONOR. He was not in a sober state; sometimes he was able to walk straight.
SA Ramsden ret.
S Ramsden x
89
TO MR DE LISSA. Nearly every Sunday I went there he was drunk.
At Erskineville on one occasion he came home drunk, and commenced abusing her, and he locked her up. She had a baby four months old in her arms. He pulled her by the hair; father and mother had to go to her assistance. Father broke the door open and struck him. Respondent struck the baby while it was in petitioner’s arms, the baby screamed; I do not remember the doctor being sent for, the baby went straight into convulsions. About a month after that it died. Respondent used to come home drunk at all hours. Petitioner never seemed to have any money, we had to help her. I do not know Mr Lemm, I never saw him or heard of him.
TO HIS HONOR. There was never any period when my mother or myself refused to assist petitioner. As far as I know there was never any misunderstanding on her part.
CROSS-EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT.
TO MR NORRIS. I did not serve Lemm with liquor that I know of. I did not know he was in Walker’s employ;
S Ramsden x
90
I do not know how long he was in Wallace’s employ.
TO HIS HONOR. When respondent and petitioner ceased living together I remember her going to the country; I could not say how long she was away. Father was living then; we were living in Regent Street, Redfern. She came at intervals to stay with us after she went away, that is after she had been to the country.
TO MR NORRIS. I served in my parents’ hotel in Regent Street. Respondent used to come there; I have often had occasion to refuse to serve him.
(Witness retired)
(At this stage the further hearing was adjourned until 2 pm)
S Ramsden ret.
91
MONDAY AFTERNOON, 4TH DECEMBER, 1911.
PETITIONER recalled:
TO MR DE LISSA. When I stayed at Mrs Bayne’s, she was under the influence of drink; she has been in bed for a week, I have seen her in bed for a week myself; I’m quite sure about that. I did not have much to say to her, I always kept to myself. She asked me to take drink with her, I refused.
(Witness retired)
(Case for the petitioner closed)
AGNES BAYNE,
sworn, examined on behalf of respondent, deposed:
TO MR NORRIS. My name is Agnes Bayne, I live with my husband at 133 Cathedral Street. (Looks at m.f.i. 1) I recognise
petitioner ret.
A Bayne x
92
that as a photograph of Mr Wilson. (Looks at m.f.i. 2) I recognise that as a photograph of Mrs Wilson.
(Photograph of Lemm (m.f.i. 1) put in and marked Exhibit No 1).
(Photograph of petitioner (m.f.i. 2) put in and marked Exhibit No 2).
I cannot say how many years ago they were at my place, it is this side of 1903; they stayed there a few weeks, seven or eight weeks. They went under the name of Mr and Mrs Wilson; they came to my house together as a married couple, they asked for a double room. They engaged one room, they occupied it together until they left; they left together. Some weeks after they had left the place respondent came there and brought me a photograph. It would not be true to say I was drunk in bed for a week while petitioner was there.
CROSS-EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER.
TO MR DE LISSA. I have not been drunk in bed, I drink a little the same as any other woman. My husband is a chorister with JC Williamson, he has been there twelve years, working all the time
A Bayne x
93
with the exception of twelve months. We have been married about twenty years. We were married on 28th October 1890 by a minister in Melbourne, at a Registry Office. I have got my marriage lines at home.
I did not see Wilson in bed with petitioner. While they were there I was not laid up; I was not laid up through taking too much liquor. I did not ask petitioner to drink with me. There are six rooms in the house; they occupied the room behind the balcony upstairs. I was up in the room when I was doing the housework, I suppose every day. I saw Wilson come into the house every day, at all hours. Petitioner never told me she had borrowed some money from Wilson and she was paying him back. I did not turn them out of my house. I let two rooms, the balcony room and the one behind, as double rooms, and I let one over the kitchen as a single room. People who come stay as long as it suits them; some may stay two or three months, and some only a few weeks. I could not say whether all the rooms were let while petitioner was there.
TO HIS HONOR. I do not remember who were there at the time.
TO MR DE LISSA. I do not remember who had the single room.
A Bayne x
94
TO HIS HONOR. I did not know either of the parties before they came there, I did not know Wilson before. Wilson came and engaged a room, nobody was with him; afterwards petitioner came there. They had the room, and the use of the kitchen to do their cooking. I am sure they were both there all the time. I saw respondent some weeks afterwards, she showed me a photograph and I gave him certain information.
TO MR DE LISSA. I was first asked to give evidence in this case the day King Edward was buried, a Friday.
TO HIS HONOR. Respondent saw me about it; he had not spoken to me between the time he showed me the photograph, and that date. I now keep a book showing who is in my house; I did not do so at that time. I have no means of showing what people were in my house at that time. Wilson paid for the room. I saw him once after he left, but not to speak to; he passed my place. I have seen petitioner once in William Street, but not to speak to.
(Witness retired)
A Bayne ret.
95
ARTHUR WALKER,
sworn, examined on behalf of respondent, deposed:
TO MR NORRIS. My name is Arthur Walker, I reside at North Sydney. In 1903 I was a clothier, and had been for many years before. I know respondent, I think he was in my employ in 1903; he has been in my employ for a large number of years, as near as I could say, 18 years.
TO HIS HONOR. I went out of business later than 1903, nobody took over the business.
TO MR NORRIS. Respondent was under my constant observation the whole time. I would describe him as a temperate man, he carried my keys for years. That involved the opening and closing, in the morning about 8 o’clock, and in the evening about 6 or half past, but we were often later than that.
TO HIS HONOR. There were two sets of keys, I had one and he had the other. He closed after the other employees had gone, and opened before they came. His position was to see the hands in and to see them out, and he was what we called an examiner. Outside that, he used to carry all the money
A Walker x
96
to the bank. He was in my employ when I went out of business.
TO MR NORRIS. In 1903 respondent spoke to me about a man named Lemm.
I remember petitioner coming to me one day in the markets and asking if I knew where Lemm was, that was after 1903.
TO HIS HONOR. Lemm was not in my employ.
TO MR NORRIS. I said I did not know where Lemm was; she called him by his name, James Lemm. She wanted to get out of Sydney, she said she wanted her fare out of Sydney.
CROSS-EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER.
TO MR DE LISSA. Petitioner did not say she wanted her fare out of Sydney because respondent was ill-treating her and drinking. Lemm was never working for me, he had no occupation; he scarcely ever worked. He is my brother-in-law, we are not unfriendly at all. I have not seen him for the last three or four years, we parted on friendly terms, we were not unfriendly; we were perfectly friendly, we had never
A Walker x
97
been out of friends. When he came to me I treated him friendly, I had no disagreement with him at all. The relationship between us was never strained, we were always friendly.
The name of my firm was A Walker for many years, and then it was known as the Sydney Clothing Manufacturing Company. Respondent first came to me somewhere in the 80s, it was my business then; speaking from memory I had 70 or 80 hands employed. My business failed, respondent was thrown out of work; in one way the business failed two or three times. The whole of the time respondent was with me he was a temperate man, I never saw a sign of drink on him in business hours; I cannot say I have seen him out of business hours during the time he was with me. I never saw him on a Sunday. I saw him many times on a Saturday afternoon, he was quite sober then.
I heard respondent was found guilty of committing sodomy on a boy at North Sydney.
Respondent is not in my employ now, he has been out of my employ about seven years; he left because my business broke up altogether.
TO HIS HONOR. When my business was transferred to the company respondent
A Walker x
98
went on with the company. He always held a responsible position. So far as I know, there was no reason whatever to distrust his capacity.
(Witness retired)
RESPONDENT,
sworn, examined by Mr Norris, deposed:
My name is George Williams [sic] McKay, I am the respondent; I reside at Darlinghurst.
After marriage I went to live at Milson’s Point for a couple of years, then we moved to Erskineville; then we shifted to another place off Erskineville next to her people; then we went back to Milson’s Point. We were under two years at Erskineville. I lived with respondent up till about nine years ago; she cleared away. Lemm had been there for a few weeks before she went. He came one night, he went to Queensland the next night; he was away a few weeks, and then came back again. I told him he had better go away to some other place; he said that was quite good enough for him. Then respondent went away with the child; I did not see her for six weeks afterwards. Then one night
A Walker ret.
respondent x
99
I came home about five past twelve, I found petitioner on the back verandah; I let her in. She went down the yard; about half past 2 she was singing how she would shoot me and burn the house down. I had been out of work for a little while, and next morning I had arranged to go to McArthur’s. I asked petitioner where her boxes were; she said she knew where they were. I forgot if I offered her a few shillings, or if she asked for them to get her boxes. I told her to get the child as I had sent the child away. I left the keys with her. When I got home that night I found the house was locked up and respondent had gone. I did not see her again till some time last year; she came to me to borrow a photograph, that was about October 1910 after the start of the divorce proceedings.
TO HIS HONOR. I have been living at Dawes Point, and in Francis’ Street. I was with Houston and company, and after that I was away, and since then I have been with Wallace in York Street.
TO MR NORRIS. I started with Wallace about five years ago. When I left Walker’s I went to McArthur’s, I was doing brushing and folding. As far as I was concerned to I did nothing to
respondent x
100
cause the petitioner to go. On one occasion I was cruel to her; one Sunday she flew at me, and in defence I gave her two smacks on the cheek. I would always take a glass or two of drink, I cannot say ever I was too bad. I would go home with liquor in; I do not think I went home drunk on any occasions. I do not think I have gone home drunk, I would have a few drinks in.
TO HIS HONOR. I used to open the warehouse at a quarter to eight, sometimes it would be eight o’clock.
TO MR NORRIS. I went to Cathedral Street and saw Mrs Bayne in 1904. I showed her a photograph; I traced Lemm first, I was with a man put on to follow him.
TO HIS HONOR. I was with Mr Blake, I am not sure where he is now. I went with Mr Blake into a hotel opposite Mrs Bayne’s. I saw Lemm go into Mrs Bayne’s. I went across and saw Mrs Bayne; I saw petitioner and Lemm hanging out of a front top window. I took a photograph down two or three nights after.
TO MR NORRIS. The last three or four years I have only been getting a small wage. I got into some trouble in 1905, I was
respondent x
101
charged with indecent assault, I was sentenced to 12 months, I was nine months away.
TO HIS HONOR. I was in prison for nine months.
TO MR NORRIS. Since then I have been earning the ordinary wage, £2-7-6. I do not get paid full time, if I lose time I do not get paid. I have been contributing to the support of my child. When I sold my furniture I gave her £5, and since then I have been giving 10/- and 12/6. Prior to that I contributed to the support of the child, but now regularly, just as I could afford it. Since this case has come on I have only given £1-12-0.
TO HIS HONOR. When I saw Mrs Bayne, petitioner and Lemm were looking out of an attic window.
CROSS-EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER.
TO MR DE LISSA. There was some talk between petitioner and myself about me carrying on with some other woman, she accused me of keeping another woman, it was absolutely untrue. The assault I was charged with was an indecent assault on
respondent x
102
a boy. Petitioner did not complain to me that I had committed indecent assaults on children. I pleaded not guilty to this charge, I have not been keeping company with another woman lately; I did not walk with any or go with any before I was in gaol, or since. I kept company with other women before marriage, but not since.
I can drink the same now as I always did. I never lost any time through it. I might have two or three before I went home to tea, and perhaps one or two in the evening. I am a brusher and folder. I have been examiner; examining if to see every garment has been made right. Since I left Walker I have been a brusher and folder. I asked petitioner’s mother where petitioner was; I never sent the mother any money to send to her. When I sold up in 1903 I got £6-10-0 for the furniture, I gave £5 for the support of the child. I was in temporary work then for 2½ months; before that I had been in regular work for 21 years, getting £3 a week. It is absolutely untrue I left the petitioner without support, there was always money in the house. I could not say how much money I spent in drink. Petitioner never said anything about her mother helping her, or her father, or her sister. On one occasion
respondent x
103
she brought a piece of bread home, and I said there was no occasion for that. She never complained there was not enough food in the house. Many a time I have given her money and she has slung it at me and said she did not want it. I had asked petitioner occasionally if she would have a glass of stout, she would not have it. I would not say I was perfectly sober on any Sunday, I had drink the same as any other day; you cannot say you are perfectly sober if you have a drink or two. I saw petitioner on one occasion after she left, but not to speak to; she was at a children’s entertainment in Redfern.
TO HIS HONOR. That was three or for years ago; she was on one side of the hall, I was on the other.
TO MR DE LISSA. I made enquiries about her on the occasion in Cathedral Street. I spoke to one of Lemm’s brothers; he told me to write and he would answer in due course; I wrote, but he did not answer. I was living at Dawes’ for a time, I had a room there and had my meals outside; then I was living in Francis Street, off College Street, near Hyde Park. I left Walker’s a couple of times through the failure; I finally left Walker about 1903 or 1904. I was
respondent x
104
not out long before I went to W Houston and Company as brusher and folder, I was there about eight months, I got £2-7-6, I had no overtime there. When I left Houston’s I went to Grafton. I saw petitioner at Wallace’s, she came there about a photograph; that was towards the middle of the year, just before I was served with this writ the petition.
I was only cruel to petitioner once; there were often tiffs between us, I cannot say I struck her. I remember hitting her twice on this one particular Sunday in self defence. I say I have not struck her on other occasions; I might have threatened to do so. I cannot remember catching her by the hair, I may have done. The youngest child died with convulsions.
TO HIS HONOR. I did not strike the child that I remember.
TO MR DE LISSA. I do not remember petitioner’s father bursting the door open. I went to see my girl pretty well every week, generally on Saturday; I used to go up to the hotel at Regent Street, it is a couple of years since they had the hotel. I used to go every week or every fortnight; I would see her on the footpath and often give her money and tell her to take it in. Ever since they took that hotel
respondent x
105
that all the trouble came.
TO MR NORRIS. When I came back from prison I wrote to my employer for employment, he did not take me back, there was no vacancy.
TO HIS HONOR. When I saw Mrs Bayne in 1904, I saw petitioner and Lemm leaning out the front attic window. She told me something about them stopping there.
(Witness retired)
(Case for the respondent closed)
JUDGEMENT.
HIS HONOR.
I think both petitions ought to be dismissed. Even if the allegation of adultery is correct I think it is too stale a claim. He knew his wife was down there, he never took any trouble, he never went down to see them, never spoke to them about it, and took no steps whatever until his wife presented a petition. So far as the petitioner is concerned, if I was satisfied with regard to her
respondent ret.
Judgment
106
allegations, it would be necessary to decide with regard to the adultery; but I am not satisfied with regard to one or the other. Her case rests entirely upon herself; she says she went away from him and has been away from him all these years. I must say I was not favourably impressed with Mrs McKay’s evidence with regard to Lemm. She certainly swore directly to Mr Norris, and also in answer to me, that this man Lemm was at the house at North Sydney with respondent and herself, that she left him there, and that she had never seen him from that day to this. Afterwards she admitted, inch by inch, that first of all she had seen him, that she had gone under the name of Mrs Wilson at 133 Cathedral Street, and had been called Mrs Wilson by the proprietress of the house. And she never objected to being called Mrs Wilson. I am not satisfied she has made out her case.
Respondent’s case rests entirely and absolutely on the question of the adultery, and without saying whether I am satisfied on it or not, I think he’s debarred from any relief from his want of promptitude in coming here. He has not tried to explain it in any way. Mr Norris suggested to him something about his means; he was earning £3 part of the time, and £2-7-6 the rest of the time. Apart from
Judgement
107
that, he did not seem to care whether she had gone off with this man or not. He made some inquiries from her mother in 1906, but up to that time he had never tried to find out if she was living in adultery or not. He said in 1904 he not only knew from Mrs Bayne, but he saw her himself with Lemm in this house in Cathedral Street.
I dismiss both petitions. I make no order as to costs.
Judgment
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Daily Telegraph, Tue 5 Dec 1911 6
DIVORCE.
———
(Before Mr Justice Gordon.)
…
McKAY v. McKAY.
Annie Elizabeth McKay (formerly Ramsden) asked for a dissolution of her marriage with George William McKay, on the grounds of desertion, drunkenness, and non-support. Mr H de Lissa (instructed by Mr LB Bertram) appeared for the petitioner, and Mr Norris (instructed by Mr ERM Newton) for the respondent, who counter-charged desertion and misconduct on the part of the petitioner. The parties were married in December, 1892, at Newtown, according to the rites of the Church of England.
His Honor dismissed both petitions, not being satisfied with the evidence on either side.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The Sydney Morning Herald, Tue 5 Dec 1911 7
DIVORCE COURT.
(Before Mr Justice Gordon.)
…
McKAY v. McKAY.
Annie Elizabeth McKay, formerly Ramsden, petitioned for a dissolution of her marriage with George William McKay. The issues were desertion, drunkenness, and failure to support.
There was a counter petition by respondent, who also asked for a divorce on the grounds of petitioner’s desertion and misconduct with James Lean, who was joined as co-respondent.
Mr H de Lissa appeared for the petitioner, and Mr Norris for respondent.
Petitioner said she was married to respondent at Newtown on December 28, 1892. Her husband was addicted to drink, and ill-treated her. On several occasions she had left him, finally leaving him nine years ago. Since then she had earned her own living, she denied that she had ever misconducted herself with the co-respondent. Co-respondent lived with her husband and herself as a boarder, and was living there when she left the house.
Cross-examined by Mr Norris, petitioner said that she had not seen husband sober since the day of her wedding. She had never lived with co-respondent under the name of Mrs Wilson.
For the respondent, Mrs Agnes Bayne, a married woman, residing at 133 Cathedral-street, Woolloomooloo, gave evidence to the effect that co-respondent and petitioner stayed at her home for seven or eight weeks as Mr and Mrs Wilson. The rent was paid by co-respondent.
The respondent said that about nine years ago he came home, and found the house locked up, and his wife gone. He denied having treated her cruelly.
Cross-examined by Mr de Lissa, respondent admitted that he had been convicted of a crime for which he had been sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment, [see George William McKay, 1905, above].
His Honor said he was dissatisfied with the evidence of both the parties, and dismissed both petitions.
1 The Daily Telegraph, Fri 1 Dec 1905, p. 10.
2 The Sydney Morning Herald, Fri 1 Dec 1905, p. 10.
3 SRNSW: NRS2138, [3/6070], Darlinghurst Gaol photographic description book, 1904-1905, No. 9921, p. 396, R5111.
4 SRNSW: NRS13495, [13/12710 , Divorce and matrimonial cause case papers, No. 7308, 1910.
5 SRNSW: NRS2713, [6/2732], Transcripts of evidence of the various courts, royal commissions, boards of inquiry, 1911, pp. 69-107.
6 The Daily Telegraph, Tue 5 Dec 1911, p. 14.
7 The Sydney Morning Herald, Tue 5 Dec 1911, p. 5.