| Notes |
- Arthur filed for divorce from Margaret a third time, this time naming John James Martin.
POVERTY BAY HERALD 7 MARCH 1928 - IN DIVORCE RACHINGER V. RACHINGER
DAMAGES CLAIM WITHDRAWN
The attention of His Honor Mr. Justice Ostler was occupied in the Supreme Court this morning in hearing a petition by Arthur James Rachinger for the dissolution of his marriage with Margaret Ann Rachinger, on the ground of alleged adultery with. John James Martin, petitioner claiming also £5OO damages from the co-respondent. Mr. L, T. Burnard appeared for petitioner, and Mr. J. S. Wauchop for the co-respondent. When the case was called this morning, Mr. Wauchop intimated that he had been instructed not to proceed with the defence, and in reply to His Honor Mr.- Burnard said the claim for damages would not be proceeded with.
The petitioner, Arthur James Rachinger, stated that he was married to the respondent on January 1, 1912. In consequence of something he heard he followed her on January 7 last, and saw her in buildings in which the co-respondent had a room. Again, on January 28 he saw the same thing, and concluded that there had been visits on the intermediate Saturdays.
Monday, January 30, was a holiday, and on that day his wife came to the factory, and they had words over Martin. Witness slipped ahead of her and went up the back stairs into the buildings where he entered an empty room. He saw Martin enter one of the rooms at about 11.40 a.m., and about 10 minutes later his wife went, in. At 3 p.m. witness tried the door quietly and waited until about. 3.30 when Martin looked out. Again 10 minutes later he looked out and thinking that the coast was clear his wife came out. Witness said ‘‘I’ve got you now." Witness wanted to get into the room, but Martin fought him for about 15 minutes. Another man came up and witness said “this man (Martin) has had my wife in his room all afternoon.” They fought again, and Martin got an opportunity to slam the door. At 6 p.m. he got into the room and found nothing but an empty wine bottle and one glass. There were marks on the floor as though furniture had been moved. Within a few days witness issued proceedings, and his wife communicated with him in regard to the children, the respondent denying in the first place the suggestion made by witness regarding Martin. Witness had the children at home. After their marriage they lived first at Brisbane and subsequently at Gisborne, and there were four children of the marriage.
Duncan McLennan, stated that he had rooms in the same building. On the afternoon of January 30 he heard scuffling, and on going out he found two men fighting. He told them to stop, and Rachinger said Martin had been in a room with his wife all afternoon. Martin called petitioner a liar. George Henry Lvsnar, part-owner of the buildings, stated that he let a room to Martin in November, and he gave it up on February 6. The door, was always closed, and witness never saw Martin, who said he wanted the room as a writing room and social room for himself and his friends. When witness received notice that Martin was leaving he found that the door was slightly open, and the room empty. George F. H. Steggall, assistant at the bacon factory of which petitioner was manager, stated that on the first day of the October races while he was standing outside the totalisator, Mrs. Rachinger said. “Look at that mad thing, Mrs. Martin.” Witness told Mrs. Martin not to make a disturbance, but Mrs. Martin said, “She wants my husband.” Martin told his wife to stop it, and she replied, “That’s right; stick up for her.” Witness later met Martin, who said he was sorry for what had happened. Witness said. “You have a good wife,” and Martin said. “Yes, one of the best.” Witness said, “Well, you leave her alone,” and Martin said, ‘‘l think I will.” His Honor said there was sufficient evidence of adultery on January 7, and he granted a decree nisi, to he moved absolute at the expiration of three months. Costs were allowed on the lowest scale against the co-respondent, and interim custody of the children was given to the petitioner.
15 March 1928. New Zealand Truth, 15 March1928:
CO-RE TO PAY: Husband Discovers Wife's Secret (From N.Z.'s Truth's Gisborne Rep.)
When John James Martin rented a room in Lysnar's Building, and told the owner, George Lysnar, that he wanted it as a writing-room and social room for himself and his friends, there was no reason why Lysnar should have suspected anything.
And for that matter, it's not likely that he ever did. The suspicious party was Arthur James Rachinger - and not even Arthur probably would not have worried about Martin's social room if it hadn't been that Mrs Rachinger seemed to be the greater part of Martin's circle of friends.
By some strange, but not unexpected, geometrical evolution, Martin's little circle was eventually transposed into the eternal triangle.
The matter was originally introduce to the Supreme Court in the form of a divorce petition and claim for 500 pounds damages against Martin, who filed a defence.
The defence however was not proceeded with, and the claim for damages was withdrawn.
The petitioner, Arthur James Rachinger, prefaced the story of his wife's alleged misconduct by stating that he and Margaret Ann had been married in1912. There were four children.
Rachinger had first seen his wife in Martin's room on January 7 last. Three weeks later she was there again and he concluded that there was a regular Saturday social gathering.
The following Monday - a holiday - he and his wife had a few words over Martin. Afterwards he slipped away ahead of her and concealed himself in an empty room in Lysnar's Building.
He had made a good guess. Martin arrived shortly before 11 o'clock and the respondent ten minutes later.
Rachinger had a long wait. At 3 o'clock he tried the door, but it was locked.
At 3.30 Martin looked out: ten minutes later he took another look. Thinking that the coast was clear, Mrs Rachinger left the room - and ran right into her husband.
The outraged husband wanted the evidence contained in that room, but Martin would not let him in and they fought for some time, Martin ultimately slamming the door.
It was 6 o'clock before Rachinger did get into the room and all he found was an empty wine bottle and a glass.
After hearing evidence of the fight in Lysnar's Building and of a row on the racecourse, the judge said he was satisfied that misconduct had been committed and granted a decree nisi, the co-re. having to pay the costs and petitioner being given custody of the children., Divorce Filed.
Poverty Bay Herald, 13 June 1928:
On the application of Mr. L. T. Burnard a decree absolute was granted to Arthur James Rachinger in the dissolution of his marriage with Margaret Ann Rachinger.
|
AIGS/FHC Member's - Family Trees
1893 - 1965 (72 years)