DIVORCE CASE.

Press, Volume LV, Issue 10213, 8 December 1898, Page 6

DIVORCE CASE.

(press association telegram.) AUCKLAND, December 7.

A divorce case of considerable interest wtis commenced in the Supreme Court. Harold W. Batger, clerk, of Auckland, petitions for » dissolution of his marriage with Hannchen Batger, on the ground oi alleged adultery with Thomas Henderson, co-respondent, and Adrian Philip Dalrymple Hughes. The respondent was not present or represented, lac petition seta out that Batger married his wife, nee Hannchen Moeller, in 1892, at Auckland. The petitioner is a son of John Batger, of Auckland, and the respondent, a daughter of Philip Moeller, of a Wellington hotel. The parties lived together for some rears at Wellington, Sydney, and Auckland. It is alleged that in September, 1896, the respondent formed adulterous connection with Thomas Henderson, und continued to jommit adultery witn this co-respondent to the beginning of 1898. She also, according ■Jo the petitioner, committed adultery with Adrian P. Hughes, whose whereabouts are unknown. The petitioner prayed for a dissolution of marriage, and the custody of one child, aged five years. The petitions filed by the respondent and co-respondent Henderson denied the adultery. Mr Theo. Cooper appears for the co-respondent. Harold Batger, who said he had been a law student, gave evidence as to his married life, which had been unhappy. His wife had been restless in her home, and stage-struck and wanted to go on the stage. He said that in 1896 his wife was incessantly witli Henderson. He had seen her going into Henderson's office and coming out with him. He had seen his wife with Henderson going to the theatre on another occasion. He told her she ought to be ashamed of herself, having a little boy like that (referring to their child), and living the life she was. He charged her straight out with being Henderson's mistress, tshe admitted it. She said she was going to marry him, and said thatHenderson*was going to assist her to go to America to get a divorce. She showed witness an engagement ring which Henderson had given her. She said it was a ring that had been worn by a lady to whom Henderson was previously engaged. She had on five or six very valuable rings. She said she was much happier living as she was than with petitioner; she had far more money than she was likely to have with him (Batger). . Petitioner told her she hadn't decency even to be true to the man who was paying for all this for her (Henderson). She said she didn't love him, she wasn't fond of him; but he was kind to her. He had men Henderson sending Mrs Batger away to America last Saturday week. He was on the steamer Akmeda looking after her luggage, and superintending things generally for her. Hβ had seen Mrs Batger and Hughes together in Auckland in June, 1896. Petitioner woe served with a maintenance BUmmone by hie wife, but she told him on her return from Napier that her brother hod made her do it, ana she tore up the maintenance order and told witness not to take any notice of it. tx reply to a remark by Mr Cooper, his Honour said he should tell the jury that the alleged admissions made to the petitioner by hie wife In the absence of Henderson were no evidence at all against the co-re-spondent.

BVaneee Annie Cronke, maid to Mrs Bfttiger ; Clara Kendall, her companion; and Alex.' Ralston, owner of the house at Northoote, in which Mrs Batger had resided, deposed to not having seen anything improper in the conduct of Mrs Batger.