A SEPARATED COUPLE.
RESIDENCE IN SAME HOUSE.
DIVORCE ACTION AS SEQUEL
An . instance of parties being mutually separated. by deed, yet residing under the same roof was mentioned when Frances Catherine McElroy (Mr. Hogben), petitioned for divorce from Herbert Thomas Granville McElroy.. The case, which was not defended, was heard at the Supreme Court yesterday by Mr. Justice Herdman. _ -■).? Petitioner said the marriage took place in- Auckland in April, 1906, and they lived together at Auckland, and later at Thames. There were four children. In 1919 a deed of separation was entered into, on account of respondent's affection for another woman.
To His Honor: Petitioner said she had no proof of misconduct. . Petitioner, continuing, • said it was agreed that, although separated they should continue to live in the same hotise on account of the respondent's position and for" the sake of the children. They did not live together as man and wife Respondent was still paying maintenance and petitioner was now living in Auckland. His Honor adjourned the case until today to enable, counsel to quote authorities,
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19230719.2.133
Bibliographic details
New Zealand Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18455, 19 July 1923, Page 11
Word Count
177A SEPARATED COUPLE. New Zealand Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18455, 19 July 1923, Page 11
Using This Item
NZME is the copyright owner for the New Zealand Herald. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons New Zealand BY-NC-SA licence . This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of NZME. 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 and NZME.