• Married: 20 May 1912, St. John's, Darlinghurst, Sydney, N.S.W., Australia ^{1 2}
• Died:

  Marriage Information:

Lillian married Sydney Leslie O'Donnell, son of George O'Donnell and Emily Maud Ryan, on 20 May 1912 in St. John's, Darlinghurst, Sydney, N.S.W., Australia ^{1 2}. (Sydney Leslie O'Donnell was born in 1887 in Redfern district, Sydney, N.S.W., Australia ³ and died on 13 May 1952 in Java Head, 3 Jensen Ave., Vaucluse, Sydney, N.S.W., Australia ^{4 5}.)

  Marriage Notes:

"O'DONNELL.-JOLLY.—May 20. at St. John's. Darlinghurst, by the Rev. E C Beck, Sydney Leslie, youngest son of George O'Donnell, Esq, Wairoa, Flood street, Bondi, to Lillian Mabel, second daughter of Leslie Jolly, Esq. Leytonstone, Frankland street Launceston, Tasmania."

--------------------------

Reserved decision was given in the consolidated suits in this case. Sydney Leslie O'Donnell asked for a decree for restitution of conjugal rights directed to Lillian Mabel O'Donnell (formerly Jolly), who denied remaining away from her husband without Justification. She raised the issue whether her husband had been guilty of cruelty towards her, and asked for judicial separation on that ground. The husband denied his wife's allegations.

The parties were married on May 20, 1912.at Darlinghurst, according to the rites of the Church of England.

His Honor said he was satisfied that the husband was never drunk or seriously affected by liquor, and he thought the wife had no substantial ground for complaint on that account. He accepted the husband's story that he had refused to speak to his wife in order to avoid quarrelling and abuse, and that he adopted that course under considerable provocation; but he thought the husband intended it to be a punishment to her as much as a protection for himself. The reconciliation which followed, however, brought a period of comparative happiness and tranquillity, which he thought lasted until December, 1935. At that time, his Honor was satisfied, the wife was not afraid of her husband, and living on good terms with him; and that he had not been guilty of cruelty to her. Most of the trouble up to that time, originated, he thought, In the wife's desire to break away from habits of life in which she had found happiness and contentment with her husband in the first 20 years of their married life. He had come to the conclusion that the petitioner was sincere in his prayer for an order for restitution of conjugal rights, and was influenced by the fact that, for many years, the respondent had been a good wife to him. and a good mother to his children.

His Honor granted the husband a decree for restitution of conjugal rights. The wife's petition was dismissed. ⁶