Opinion
09-29-1905
KLINE v. KLINE.
L. A. Campbell, for complainant.
Bill for divorce on the ground of desertion by Florence Emma Kline against Robert Cornwall Kline. Bill dismissed.
L. A. Campbell, for complainant.
STEVENSON, V. C. The master has reported in favor of granting the complainant a divorce. The separation occurred on October 26, 1902, about six weeks after the marriage, and the bill was filed October 29, 1904, three days after the expiration of the period of two years from the commencement of the alleged desertion. The proof of desertion must be found in the uncorroborated testimony of the complainant. The other witnesses produced on behalf of the complainant merely testify to the continuance of the separation—the physical fact of separation for two years. This is not a sufficient corroboration of the desertion charged. Corder v. Corder (N. J. Ch.) 59 Atl. 309. The rule is inflexible that the matrimonial offense cannot be established by the uncorroborated testimony of the applicant for the divorce. For all that appears from the testimony of the witnesses in this case other than the complainant, the separation might have been caused by the fault of the wife, or might have been in accordance with an agreement between the husband and wife.
Counsel for the complainant frankly admits that the wife's story of desertion is entirely without corroboration, but suggests that from the nature of the case corroboration is impossible. Conceding that this insistment is correct, the case still remains within the operation of a rule of evidence laid down by this court, not merely for the purpose of compelling applicants for divorce to make a full disclosure or to bring all the testimony within their power, but for the purpose of protecting the public against collusive and other fraudulent divorces. It may be that occasionally a meritorious applicant for divorce may fail to obtain relief under the operation of this wholesome rule, even though such applicant may produce every possible piece of testimony tending to throw light upon his case.
The master's report cannot be confirmed. The bill must be dismissed.