The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1892-03-19


-" justification, the ill-conduct of
g 'the complainant and on establish
" sing such defence to the satisfac-
" stion of the court, the suit may
+" 'be dismissed
"Although both parties pray for
ga separation, yet there is not the
"slightest indication of collision, on /
"the contrary each party has done
call in his or her power to show the |
-"ill-couduct of the other. The charge |
'tof adultery made by respondent |
against plaintiff brought out con-
fsiderable testimony on both sides.
ssNow to establish this charge it is
Unnecessary that the proof should be |
"positiYe and conclusive as it would |
shave to be should the party be
"charged with the criminal offense
"of adultery, before a conviction
"could be had. Although it is not
Unnecessary that there should be eye
witnesses to the act itself, yet the
"eVidence must be of such nature
"that it cOnvinces the court or jury
"beyond a reasonable doubt of the
"guilt of the accused. The evidence
Gin this case does not so convince
tme that plaintiff had been guilty
ttOf adultery with the said Walker,
ftand the evidence is solely confined
fsto him and no other man; the
'Eplaintiff may have shown some in
"discretion, but the proof fails in
"showing any illegal intercourse
"between them; even if it had, the
"offense has been condoned, the
"parties having lived together as
"man and wife since the time of
"the alleged adultery.
at is clear to me from evidence
"that it is utterly impossible for
"these parties to live together under
"the circumstances and their pre-
"sent state of feelings. 1t is one Of
"those unfortunate cases where re-
generalization at any rate for the
"present cannot take place.
"The question of the custody and
"control of the children, is one of
''great moment, they are of tender
"years and should not be placed in
ga boarding school unless it Is absov
mutely necessary. This would have
ato be done if the custody was
"aWarded to the respondent, for the
"nature of his employment is such
s'that he is away from Honolulu
"most of the time, and he could not
"maintain a home for them. The
"evidence of his general good char
"acter and industry in his employ
''ment is very satisfactory, / could
ssnot say he was an improper person
s'to have the custody of the children.
"These children are girls and re-
squire the proper care and attention
"of a mother. The question is, is
sthe mother proper and fit person
"tO have the care of these little
stgl rls ? It is cOntended that she is
"not. From the evidence do not
'sfind that she is unfit to have charge
"of these minors, she has perhaps a
"viOlent temper at times, out there
isis no evidence of any acts of
evidence ON her part toward her
sschildren, on the contrary she seems
"to have taken good care of them.
"The question of al1mony is one
ssof Importance to all concerned. 1t
ssappears that there is a large amount
ssof debts to be paid by the res
Hpondent, and that he has had to
"draw two years rent in advance
"from the Fort street property to
"enable him to pay off what debts
''he has, and for money to carry on
"these proceedings; SO that at pre-.
l sssent his only income is his wages
"of $3.50 per month. The plain.
, "tiff and children must have some
l "support and the children must be
| "educated.
81 decree separation of the par
4 tsties from bed and board forever
s 'tand I award the care and custody
: "of the said children to the plaintiff
o 'ttheir mother, the respondent at al
'times to have the right to see anC
I "vIsit said children. And I orde
> "that the respondent shall pay tt
"the plaintiff the sum of thirty
g "dollars per month, payable the las
u "day of each month beginning
f; "August 31st, 1891, for the main
}, "tenance and support of the plaintiff
Il "and her children, she paying fol
q ''education and clothing and othe
u "expenses Of the children. The res
II "pondent to pay costs of these pro
q "ceedings and fifty dollars for coun
% ''sel fees. Parties may apply from
IS ''time to time to the court for mOdi
q 'tfication of this order, or for sucl
q sother and further relief as the cir
Is '.cumstances may require" TIL
Is respondent appealed.
}, Having heard the arguments o
q counsel and read the evidence a
1t taken by the shorthand reporter
le we now think that the decree Ough
ID to be sustained so far as it grant
s. the separation.
D. Both parties desire 1t, not collu
a sively, but on account of the IRE
le concilable differences between them
"a The proofs show that the respon
se dent is an engineer on one of on
in domestic steamers, and is necessaril
id absent from his home in Honolulu
IN most of the week. The proofs ais
er show circumstances casting yer