HODDER DIVORCE CASE.

Auckland Star, Volume L, Issue 281, 26 November 1919, Page 7

HODDER DIVORCE CASE.

1 m CO-RESPONDENT'S EVIDENCE. DESiEAJi OF MISCONDUCT. The defended divorce case, Gordon Hodder v. Florence Evelyn Hoddcr and Karl Ifwecsen, was continued yesterday afternoon and to-day at the Supreme Court, before Mr. Justice Cooper and a jury. A peculiar feature of the ease was that m> defence was offered by Mre. Hodder, but only by the co-respondent, liwersen. The husband alleged that his wife misconducted herself -on two occasions at Sydney with Ifwersen, while the latter was a member of the New Zealand League football team, and afterwards an two occasions at Auckland. In view of the fact that admissions by the respondent were inadmissible in the proceedings, the charge was confined" to one alleged act of misconduct at Auckland. Mr. R, A. Singer appeared for the petitioner, and Mr. S. L. Patersonfor the co-respondent, and Mr. A. J. Moody watched the case on behalf of the respondent. Ifwersen, in the course of further evidence, said that the day before the team left Sydney' he went to La Ferouse, in company with Mrs. Hodder and eoine other woinaii to see aboriginals throw boomerangs. The party kept together, and they were all back iii Sydney by 5 p.ni. Mr. and Mrs. Hodder left for New Zealand on the steamer with the team. At Newcastle, the next day, he went ashore with another member of the team. Mrs. Hodder came up to him and said that if he did not speak to her she would smack his face. He replied: "1 wish you would do it In front of your husband." On the voyage across he saw her pnry about the deck, and on one or two occasions he said "Good morning" to her. After the team had landed at Auckland she sent him a message asking him to see her at night, but he refused. He went on to say that in the match against the Australian team on September 20, he received an injury which necessitated surgical attention. On Sunday, September 28, he was still suffering from the injury, and he visited a private hospital in the afternoon to have his injury dressed. He then went down town and after trying in vain in the evening to find Hodder, he and a friend obtained a car and drove to an. address at which he understood he would find Mr. Hodder. He was then directed to another address, and was told here that Mr. Hwider was out, but that Mrs. Hodder was in. She came out, but he declared ttoat no impropriety occurred between them. He was only there five, or ten minutes.

SHE HAS CONFESSED. Later, as the result of receiving a. wire from. Mrs. Hodder, lie met her one morning in the Domain. When they, met he asked what she wanted, and she replied, '1 have confessed." Witness said, "What tot" She made no reply, but started crying. She then asked him to be co-respondent, ami said if he consented she .-would, pay .all >the costs. .He refused and'asked her to'see hie solicitor, making an appointment, but she did not. keep it.

Under -cross-examination witness said his farming experience extended over about three months, and he was in partnership wrlVh, his brother in a farm.

Mr. SingtXT Would it be correct to jsay Jfrs. ,Hodd<sr -was infatuated,with No, I wouVd not say that.

Mr. Singer: Over-fond, shall we say?— Jiang mc up..:*-.--- = j So you thought it was better to avoid her:»-—Tes, as much as I poseibly could. .

Then wfcgr did yon go out •with her to La PeroikWs on July 21- Wee it just because of the bomerangs?—Yes, just the boomerang fe. It is not: true then that you and Mrs. Hodder misconducted- youreelves at Iβ. Perouse?— -Quite untrue. He denfid emphatically that he had et any time nfiscondncted himself with Mrs. Hodder. He would also say on oath that he liiiud not asked Mrs. Hodder to come to court and deny that witness and nerdelf host -'~ miscohditiited' themselves She did "not teU 3nm.:wh6m ehe had mentioned in her written confession the SKoSK" 0 " 1 she *" *•" *** b f Richard Percival, -wh*> had gone to the respondents house with Ifwersen on September 28, gave evidence corroborating Ifwerserr-s account of the visit. He eaid that lie wfb within a few yards of Ifwersen and Mrs. Hodder throughout theie conversation, and could ewear that no misconduct took place. Ivan Stewart and William Williams members of the League football team' described interviews between Ifwersen and Mrs. Hodder in Australia, and evidence about injuries received by Ifwersen just prior to September 28 was given by Dr. E. N. Drier. • Counsel addressed the jury, and hia Honor summed up this morning.