THE MARITAL TIE

Evening Post, Volume CII, Issue 41, 17 August 1921, Page 6

THE MARITAL TIE

UNDEFENDED DIVORCE CASES

His Honour Mr. Justice Reed dealt ■with further undefended divorce cases at I the Supreme Court to-day.

RIDER v. RIDER;

Effie Murska Amelia Rider, for whom Mr. P. W. Jackson appeared, sought the dissolution of her marriage with John Neil Reardon Rider, on the ground that he had been'guilty of misconduct with a Mrs. Graham. The marriage took place, she said,- in 1916, and she and her husband had lived at Foxton. Trouble arose in. August last year, and that trouble was added to when petitioner and respondent and the Grahams went to Wanganui about Christmas time. The party of four went to a picture show, but were separated when they took, their seats. Respondent and Mrs. Graham left the theatre early, and did not return to the hotel till about midnight. There ware words, and Graham told his wife that if anything of the kind occurred again he \would have nothing more to do ■with her. . •

■ "What sort of a man is Graham?" asked his Honour, "Why did he not do something to Ridor? Is .Eider a big man?" .. ' -

"I don't know," answered witness, "but I do know that he has a bad arm, and cannot play tennis, or do anything like that."-

The party, witness continued, was broken upy and she and her husband, ■not on friendly terms, returned to Foxton. She paid for her own. hotel accommodation, at Wanganui, but E.ider, she discovered, paid for Mrs. Graham's accommodation. Petitioner complained that the respondent had wrongfully given articles, including a bicycle, to Mra. Graham. v Later she engaged' a. private detective to make inquiries. ' There were no children of the marriage. The private detective, giving evidence this morning, detailed observations he Jiad made at Foxton. On several nights the respondent, had visited' Mrs. Graham at her house, and had remained on the premises till late haurs, Graham being then not, living .with his wife. Witness added that he ' had previously ' given similar evidence, at Palmerston North, when Graham instituted proceedings against his. wife. . . „ After hearing brief corroborative evidence his Honour granted a decree nisi, to be made absolute within' three months, with costs on the highest scale. M'MAHON v. M'MAHON.' Elizabeth Margaret M'Mahon, represented by Mr, P. J. O'Regan, asked for a divorce from her. husband, Frank M'Mahon, on the gfounds that he had not complied with the provision's of a separation .order, and that he had been guilty of misconduct. She was married, she stated, in March, 1902, but obtained an order of judicial separation .■■.gainst her husband in the Magistrate's Court in June, 1917. For a time; her husband .had complied .with the order as to Maintenance, but she believed that th* arrears of maintenance were now over £100. There were no children of the marriage. In 1918 an affiliation order I was made against, respondent in favour of one Mary AnnJCerslake. The usual order was made.