The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1901-12-23
OPINION OF THE COURT BY FREAR, CT

This action for divorce the grounds of extreme
cruelty and habia ntempernce At the trial the beant
and other witnesses introduced support of the pe
Upon the of her case, for the belee
nOunced that there defense The theeupon dis
missed the libel the general ground that the proof
sufficient without going into details Counsel for the belant
then requested continuance for the purpose of producing
further evidence upon the ground of habtua inempeance
Time given additional produced
this ground The then again dismissed the libel for the
that there sufficient proof this time setting
forth the length in oral opinion The
beee brings the here exceptions certain findings
and rulings in this opinion. The ground of habitua intern
Perance abandoned in this As the other ground it
conended that the trial erred in holding substantially
% that charge of unfathfuness by the husband against
a charge OF adultery;
2) that mental suffering alone could constitute extreme
cruelty (3 charge of adultery could constitute
extreme cruelty unless made the presence of third persons
One particular of conduct may be held
cruelty, and another and CONCENTRATIONS may be
made certain extent what constitutes extreme cruelty,
but from the very definition of
cruelty be framed which be satisfactorily easily APP
piled all The prevailing view to be that per
violence necessary but that it sufficient if the
conduct such impair the health produce bodily injury
or such as apprehension bodily injury The
be physical injury, but this may be actual
apprecnde and may be direct indirect through mental sui
fering Mental suffering generally deemed sufficient
impair the health in other words if men
suffering sufficient generally that mpars the
health In by cruelty may consist
of mental suffering alone, and perhaps in this
has been held in the absence Of This may be
able view but need i'll this express opinion
what weight should be given it considering the preponderanco
Of authority 70 the contrary.
present false and malicious charges of adultery
relied constituting cruelty. These often
said constitute crueybut whether because they
are supposed impairment of health
apprehension of personal violence bodily injury because
they supposed produce mental suffering does
clearly appear No doubt weight should usually he
charges of this character when false and malicious
much weight given depends somewhat upon what of
cruelty adopted by the particular But while
this and while expressions occasionally found the
effect that such charges cruelty, the
whole do the inference that
charges of this character all constitute cruelty
any particular is chiefly question of fact be de-
terminel all How cruel isas-
their effect such charges particular
depend reckes-lv repeated
" how publicly how maou>lv they made. the degree Of
refinement and delcacy of sen~ibly of the parties many
other considerations In in which charge. have
entered into consideration there have been other circumstances
also considered in connection with charges Tn Barnes
r. Barnes % Cal III, where the statute expressly rro
vded that revous mental suffering alone without reference
to bodily injury constituted extreme cruelty the court said