A husband's suit for the dissolution of his marriage on the grounds of his wife's desertion was dismissed by Judge Sir Allan Mossop in H.M. Supreme Court on Wednesday, The petitioner, Mr. Henry Edward Bland, applied for a divorce on the grounds that his wife, Mrs, Maude Bland, had left him and returned to England in 1923 but the Judge pointed out that it would be dangerous to allow the petitioner to proceed in the absence of respondent merely because she was out of China.
His Lordship said—This is a/nusband's suit for dissolution of manage on the ground of the wife's desertion, and the petitioner applies by motion today, under Rule 16 of the China (Divorce) Rules of Court, 1921, for an order for substituted service of the petition upon the respondent, In his affidavits the petitioner sets out that the respondent left him and returned to England in June, 1923; that he has not seen her since; that she corresponded with him up to about the month of June, 1983; that her last known place of address was at Burton in England; but that he is quite unaware of her present address or whether she is alive or not.
Now à suit for dissolution of mar-n is a matter of very grave importance. Its consequences are po serious that the Court should be vel cautious of allowing a petitioner proceed in the absence of the respondent, who, under our Rules at Court, might be precluded from appealing against the decree after the lapse of one month from its date. In this case no attempt has been made in discover where the respondent now is, The petitioner knows that her last place of address was at Buxton in England, but he has made no enquiries. If enquiries had been made there, something might have been heard of the respondent. She may still be there and if she had notice of these proceedings she might appear, It would be very dangerous to allow the petitioner to proceed in the sence of the respondent merely because she is out of China and he does not know where she is. As was held in Sudlow v. Sudlow (1858) 28 LI. (P. & M.) 4—"Before dispensing with personal service the Court ought to be fully satisfied that every effort has been made to find out the respondent, and give him an opportunity of appearing." In the present ease no such effort has been made. Accordingly, the motion will stand dismissed, The armed guards cannot be seen as they have various tooms at different strategical points where they are on duty throughout the 24 hours of the day. An elaborate alarm system, which cannot be heard in the gambling salons but which is so fitted that each man can hear it, has been installed in the various establishments.
The main function of the guards consists in protecting the large amount of cash which is kept on the premises and which is in the vicinity of some $300,000 in the more elaborate establishments. About $20,000 is on the tables and in the salons, whilst the remainder is kept in safes which in turn are closely guarded, whilst the auxiliaries lay in waiting in the vicinity of the dens so that they can give the signal in the event of an attack being in progress against their particular establishment.
The guards are, for the greater part ex-convicts, many being former armed robbers and murderers and they are mostly natives of Kompo and Ningpo. Apart from their salaries and bonus, they receive free quarters and food and they are permitted to gamble when off duty so that most of their earnings return into the coffers of the gambling den operators. Accusations, that they relieve lucky gamblers of their winnings, are strenuously denied by these members of the under world fraternity, who, it is understood, act under a "code of honour" of their own, although it is known for a fact that when gamblers realize a winning exceeding $3,000 or $4,000, they are "taken care of" when they leave the establishment when they are not regular patrons. The last case of this &ind occurred at one of the dens situated off Edinburgh Road.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.