Her “Long Lost Husband!”

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 750, 24 August 1929, Page 20

Her “Long Lost Husband!”

Embarrassing Predicament of British Film Star, Sued as Deserter “ Never Saw the Woman Before in My Life.”

Being a married man. with a family of his own, Mr. Perry Marmont. of film fame, was a little surprised <and pained I '(o hear that he had another wife living in Liverpool.

A woman teho claimed that Mr. Percy Marmont. the film actor tea., her missing husband and the father of her three children, brought an amazing action in Wallasey Police Court recently. She summoned Mr. Marmont for £585 arrears under a separation order and declared that she recognised him as her husband who had deserted her when she saw him in a film. Mr. Marmont —a married man —said hr had never seen the woman until a meeting was arranged last March. The magistrates dismissed the case.

■R. MARMONT was sued | by Mrs. Hilda Scholes. j aged 50, of Holly well, I Marmont was her husband, Garland Scholes, whom she married in 1900, he being then a widower. Garland Scholes (said her solicitor, Mr. E. H. Roberts) deserted his wife in 1903. That year, Mrs. Scholes had obtained a separation order against her husband, with 15s a week maintenance. Her husband disappeared and nothing was paid under the order. Some years later, the solicitor continued, Mrs. Scholes heard that her husband had joined a touring company. Last year she instructed a solicitor, who saw Marmont in London, and challenged him with being her husband. Mr. Marmont denied this and his solicitor wrote: My client does not know you, and has never met you. He. is not. prepared to leave the matter where it is, and unless you are. satisfied that, he is not your husband and will undertake not to repeat the allegations my instructions are to take proceedings against you and have the annoyance ended. Hotel Meeting A meeting between Mrs. Scholes and Mr. Marmont was arranged at the Exchange Hotel, Liverpool, on March IS, Mrs. Scholes, said her solicitor, without the slightest hesitation, identified Marmont as her husband. Mr. Marmont denied that Mrs. Scholes was his wife and said he had never seen her before. Mrs. Scholes. in the witness-box, was asked by Mr. Roberts: Is the defendant your husband or not? "He is my husband,” replied Mrs. Scholes. Have you any doubt? —None. Mrs. Scholes said that after her husband left her she saw a picture of him in a newspaper and understood that he had gone on the stage. Mr. Fyfe (for Mr. Marmont): You realise the very serious allegation made against Mr. Marmont, that his present marriage is not a marriage and his wife is a ruined woman?—l do. How long had you known Mr. Scholes before your marriage?— Twelve months. Mr. Fyfe: You knew he was a widower and that he had married his former wife in 1597? The reply was inaudible. Mr. Fyfe: Has defendant any birth marks or anything you can identify him by ? —I do not know of any.

Just before the war in 1914 whars were you living?—l think in Wales. ’’'Can’t you remember?” asked Mr Fyfe. “You’re putting everything on your memory, even to the fact thai this man is a bigamist.’’ “I think it was Hoilyweli,” Mrs. Scholes replied. Mr. Fyfe: Is it true that between 1924 and 192 a you recognised your husband on the screen?—Yes. “Street of Forgotten Men” What was the picture?— l can't remember. You saw a man who had deserted you and you can't remember the film 7 —He was blind in it. Any other.-*? —“The Street of Forgotten Men”—as a beggar. Would it be fair to say all the parts you saw him play iu were sensational and heroic and that you were struck by him?—Vary struck. Mr. Fyfe submitted that it would be ruin fbr Mr. Marmont’s wife and children if the charges were proved. The case was dismissed. In an interview, later, Mr. Marmont said: “I first beard of the matter last November. 1 received a letter from the woman’s solicitors saying I owed her £I,OOO for maintenance. “Being a married man with children. I was rather amused at this obvious case of mistaken identity, but I took the letter to my solicitor, and told him I had never heard of the woman and had certainly not married her. “For three weeks nothing happened. Then 1 learned that tha solicitors had satisfied themselves there was nothing in the case and had thrown it up. Soon afterward another solicitor looked me up and asked me for particulars of my birth, marriage and career. I gave him all the details I could. “Walked Out” “I was still not taking the matter seriously, but later on, as I was to pass through Liverpool on my way to America, I agreed to meet the woman. “The interview took place at the Exchange Hotel, Liverpool. The woman looked at me and said, ‘That is the man.’ I did not speak to her but walked out. I then took steps to prepare a defence. “The marriage certificate of the man Scholes showed he was a widower aged 26 at the time 0/ my supposed wedding. I was then 16. Hirst first marriage had taken place when I was 13 and at school." “Naturally, it could not be proved that I was Mr. Scholes, aged 57, and the case fell through. The other side has to pay all the costs.” Mr. Marmont added that he thought there should be some legal protection for anyone who may Me involved in such a case. “Anyone can bring an action accusing you of beiug their father or brother or husband, and in some cases it might be very awkward. “I have a boy finishing at Dartmouth, and it is rough luck on him to be dragged into such a case. He is a sensible lad, but you can imagine his feelings.”