DIVORCE CASES.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 23 August 1924, Page 5

DIVORCE CASES.

TWO PETITIONS. SAME RESPONDENT IN BOTH. (by TELEGRAPH— PRESS ASSOCIATION.) AUCKLAND, Aug. 22. A matrimonial complication was dealt with by Mr Justice Reed in the Supreme Court, when he gave decisions 111 ai * undefended divorce case, which was followed by an application for a decree of nullity of marriage. The same man was respondent in both petitions. Elizabeth Webber sought a dissolution of her marriage with Mark Webber, labourer, of Auckland, on the grounds of adultery, the man having gone through the form of marriage with Mary Finlay Sharkie, widow. The last-mentioned sought the annulment of her marriage with Webber. Mrs Webber stated that the marriage took place in 1899, and there were three children, two alive. Webber left her with the children veai's +F; , had heard from the police that he had since gone through the form of marriage with another woman. Mrs Sharkie stated that she went through the form of marriage with Webber on September 29, 1922 After living with her about a month lie deserted her.

A private enquiry agent stated that when he served the papers he told Hebber his wife was instituting divorce proceedings. He asked “Which th e " Yr tn m S . re P lied: “Both of them. Mrs Sharkie was present; and, turning to her, be said: “This is vour little game; you have set a trap" for

granted a decree nisi to Mrs Webber, and granted Mrs Sharkie a decree absolute for nullity of mar- /' lth cos s* on the Jower scale against respondent. The two women left the court -together.