DEFENDED DIVORCE.
HEDLEY V. HEDLEY. Evidence for the respondent in the divorce action in which Emily Maud Hedley (Mr. J. F. W. Dicksonf is seeking a dissolution of her marriage with David Alex. Hedley (Dr. Bamford), was adduced before Mr. Justice Cooper and a jury to-day. The proceedings opened yesterday, when evidence in support of the petition was given at length l»y petitioner. To-day evidence was given by the respondent denying that he had used filthy language to his wife, and that she had just cause to leave home. Evidence was given by the son. David Henry Hedley, that bis father had 'been a good husband, and that he had never beard his father use filthy language to his wife, but on the contrary «he had on one occasion when he out his arms nrnrnid her in an affectionate manner called him a very na=tv name.
The case is proceeding.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19200525.2.62
Bibliographic details
Auckland Star, Volume LI, Issue 124, 25 May 1920, Page 6
Word Count
150DEFENDED DIVORCE. Auckland Star, Volume LI, Issue 124, 25 May 1920, Page 6
Using This Item
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Auckland Star. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 New Zealand licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Acknowledgements
This newspaper was digitised in partnership with Auckland Libraries.