The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1901-12-23


sy of which great mental distress To the per
son against whom they are made Whether in any given
been inflicted this grievou mental suffering pure
question of deduced from all the circumstances OF
particular keeping always in view the intelligence
apparent refinement decacy of sentiment of the complain
ing party; and arbitrary rule of law what particular
probatiye shall order justify finding of the
ultimate be given As said by Mr.
Justice Mcfarland in his dissenting opinion in Valdon
WaIdrOn So Cal PSI: Every where divorce sought
this ground must depend upon its own particular facts and
correct decision depends dependupon
the sound sense and Judgment of iuries and courts.
Now referring in the light foregoing, the points
raised in this case that the trial erred saying:
another thing the charge of faithfuness made by the
defendant against his wife, made in the presence of
any other person but her Alone 1t is conended that such
charge might constitute cruelty though not
the presence others and in support of this view
authorities cited which hold that such charges sufficient
Though in all the other circumstances also
sdered) when made in letters the wife As read the trial
courts opinion this proposition of law not disputed The
fact that the charge if made made the presence of
third parties merely another thing" that the
dered along with the of the That it proper
thing consider by reasoning above well by
many in which such fact is mentioned of importance
See g. Barnes Barnes, supra; OrEy Orley 191 Pa.
St 474; Haght Haig 80 n. w. Qa) 443 Crou Croc,
20 Or 1872 Moreover the Judge to have referred to
this fact chiefly bearing the question whether the charge
had been made for he proceeded Immediately in the para
graph that there boarders and dodgers in the house
and yet that they brought testify the making of
such charge although they testified other abusive language
by ibeee wife, paragraph Immediately fol
of other given show that such
charge had been satisfactorily proved The did
hold that such charges could constitute cruelty
unless made in the presence of third persons"
Another point is that the trial erred in saying:
1T is not shown that at any time husband the
wife threatened strike her, is shown that there
any reasonable apprehension of bodily harm of any that
the conduct of the defendant, reprehensibe wounded
the feelings of the plaintiff such degree affect her
health reasonable apprehension that it might be
affected"
This statement is merely portion of the courts summary
the evidence 1t followed Immediately by the
that, 1T is that false and malicious charge Of adultery
made by either of the pouses generally held be cruelty
yet in this there absolutely evidence that the husband
charged the wife with adutey In other words
after stating what the evidence showed, stated,
passage objected what it did show, and then pro-
ceeded to consider the contention charges of adultery.
The ground then under extreme cruelty and
the very properly the evidence on that
ton 1t did not hold that false and malicious charge of
adultery could constitute cruelty unless resulted
IN bodily harm reasonable apprehension of bodily harm,
although that is what mostco courts hold.
The two passages above quoted from the opinion trial
court could hardly be construed when taken alone
rulings respectively that mental suffering not con
tue extreme cruelty that charge of adultery could not
constitute extreme cruelty unless made in the presence of third
persons Much less they be construed when read in con-
nection with the of the opinion
The remaining and principal point that the trial court
erred in finding that there proof that charges
of adultery made The only witness on this point was the
ibelmt herself She testified that
afternoon with her husbands permission and that when
came home in the evening she abused
mfaithfu and everything and said running
with other and everything that contemplate and
nean and when asked if he charged her with untaituI
ness She replied: He has YES, and when asked