Scottish Court of Session Decisions

Mrs Bowman or Graham was on 31st January 1880 divorced on the ground of adultery. On 20th May 1880 she raised an action of reduction of the decree of divorce founded on averments of collusion and fraud, as well as on a denial of her guilt. After the proof the Lord Ordinary (Adam) assoilzied Mr Graham from the conclusions of the action, and this interlocutor was affirmed by the Second Division on 15th December 1881. She now brought this petition, in which she set forth that she had applied to Mr Graham to allow her access to the children of the marriage at different periods of the year according to any reasonable arrangement that might be made, but that all access had been refused, and prayed the Court to find her entitled to reasonable access to the children of the marriage at such times and in such manner as to the Court might seem meet.

Answers were lodged by her husband, who submitted that having regard to what was proved in the action of reduction as to her conduct, and in the interests of the children themselves, she ought not to have the access to her children as craved.

Page: 816↓

The petitioner referred to the case of Symington v. Symington, March 18, 1875, 2 R. (H. of L.) 41.

The respondent argued—In England the rule founded on good reason and on statute was to the effect that where a marriage is dissolved on the ground of the wife's adultery, the Court will not grant her the custody of or access to the children of the marriage— Bent v. Bent and Footman, July 11, 1861, 30 Matr. Cases, 175. As far as the law of Scotland was concerned there were no instances recorded in which the Court had followed a different rule. Any cases which could be cited were cases where the husband had been in fault.

At advising—