The Decisions Given by His Honour the Chief Justice. Ycie Honour the Chief Jus vce gideW over the Divorce Divinio: the Supreme Court yesterda und de livery judgment in the cause of Ida Maud Meeks is William Nathaniel Meeks. The petitoner asked the Court to a dissolution of her marriage on the ground that her husband had dos ed her, and tad misconducted him self with anothner Woman, with whom he was living in delivering Judgment Justice said it was a petition in which the petitioner soun it divorce at the ground of adultery and deserion, and from the evidece he was satis fied that the charges of adultery and desetion were established Under those Circurstabher: he betitioner would, 't the ordinary course , be en titled c.early to a divorcee. Were it not that there were facta which gave rise to the qu Sion w ether there had been undue delay on the part of the petitioner. ‘en though adultery were established the and desertion petitioner had during that ting’ she took no steps to seek a divorce, the only belief tha she sought was to apply to the Resi dent Magistrate for an armer for maintenance the petition, how ever, stated that she had typed all along that her husband would take her back, and that she defayed in flawed nine y ears, and taking action in order to use bb he would come back In the first in stance, the personer apyile for ju dicial separation and alimony, and it was after this that the divorce was filed. The solicitor for the juntitioner had, however, given some explana tions on this point. What he desired to h@ard against, even though adul tery and desertion had been tal a was whether the delay in g the petitions such as would justify the disallowance of the petition. He held (after exercisig discretion in the matter) that there was REASONABLE CAUSE POR DELAY He had come to the conclusion that im the case of desertion, it was a cor tinual thing, which had been con tinued right up to the toe of the trial. With regard to adal algo continued right up to the time of the trial Having regard to the petitioners explanation as regards to means, ve had come to the conclusion WINE nor without some hesita ton that the circumstances in this Piletcular case were not such as he ould deprive the betitioner of her WightS; anid under these circumstances he granted a decree mish with costs and custody of the children Mr Radclifte enquired about sati Mmony, but the Chief Justice informed him that he would have to file a spe cial pettryon t the trial of the case. Mr Rad cliff, instructed by Messrs Milhol land, Aschenheim and Stone, appeared for the petitioner tery, it was ANOTHER CASE. His Honour west heard the divorcee Petition of Llewellyn vs Llewellyn The suit was nnodefended. The petitioner, Wilhelmina Llew ellyn, said she was married to the respondent in the Parish of St. Cat herine. She resided with her husband at Pear Tree Grove until 1912. There were children to the marriage, but they were all dead in June to her husband turned her out of the house She knew Ambrosine Ellis. Her husband lived with Ellis by whom he had a child Her husdband also had a child by another woman, named Elizabeth Wright Hier husband had struck her with his fist, and flogged her with a ‘supple jack” on several occasions. Caroline Cox was next called by the petitioner She said she knew the respondent He had a child by a wo man named Ambrosine Ellis, she knew of this, because she lived in the same district The respondent and Ellis lived in the same house. The Chief Justice granted a decree nisi. When you were young . How you hated to take a dose of cod liver oil. That was years ago. Now children and elderly folks take VINOL. Vincl is a real cod liver preparation with the use less oil taken out — tonic iron added. That’s why Vinci restores health and creates strength. Vincl tastes good, and is a great improvement on old fashioned cod liver oil and emulsions. For Sale by all Druggist, Chester Kent Co., Chicago, Boston, Maser, U.S.A.