UNDEFENDED DIVORCE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 18026, 27 February 1922, Page 5

UNDEFENDED DIVORCE.

A HUSBAND'S DISCOVERY, j ' An undefended divorce case was heard in the Supreme Court on Saturday by Mr Justice Stringer, tho petitioner being' Hugh Gordon Bartleet (Mr. Ostler), who j sought a dissolution of his marriage with | Ethel Nancy Bartleet (Mr. Luxford), on 1 the grounds of adultery. Arthur Wilson (Mr. Leary, instructed by Mr. Sullivan) being cited as co-respondent Neither the respondent nor the co-respondent was present at the hearing. A counter-petition had been filed by the respondent and the co-respondent, but counsel in each instance asked leave to have these withdrawn when tho case came before the Court, and this was granted. Petitioner stated that he was married to the respondent in Christchurch, Bournemouth, England, on January 16, 1918. After the marriage they lived in England, Auckland, and Hinuera. On December 26 last he and a private detective went to Orewa near Waiwera, the respondent being there at the time. She was not living with petitioner then. They had been separated for about 12 months, and he had respondent under surveillance. They found respondent and corespondent together in a room in the hotel at Orewa. His Honor: How did you come' to separate. Petitioner: On account of rows. I had suspicions- of her misconduct then. We mutually agreed to separate, and I was allowing her £4 a week. _ At this stage certain written admissions made by the respondent' wore put in as evidence. His Honor: There are no children, are there? ' Mr. Ostler: No, sir. A decree nisi was granted with costs against the co-respondent.