IN DIVORCE.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIII, Issue 2317, 18 August 1921, Page 3

IN DIVORCE.

RIDER v. RIDER

An undefended divorce case was heard by His Honour Air Justice Reed, in the Supreme Court, Wellington, yesterday, when Elfie Alurska Amelia Rider (Mr Jackson) asked that her marriage with John Neil Reardon Rider should he dissolved on the ground of his' alleged adultery.

Giving evidence, the petitioner said that she was married in 190 G, living with her husband in Wellington and at Foxion. She alleged that impropriety had taken place on a Sunday evening, when the respondent, as a volunteer fireman, “should have- been at a fire.” Mrs Graham, whose husband was a friend of respondent and of petitioner, was (lie person with whom the adultery was alleged to have been committed. On another date, the respondent, as president of the .FoxtonJßific Club, arranged an excursion to A\angauui_. at which petitioner and AH' and Airs Graham were present. On ibis occasion, alleged petitioner, the four went to,a picture show, and .Rider anil Airs Graham left, thinking they were unobserved. The pair did not return to the hotel until alter midnight. /

Continuing, petitioner said that her husband had paid Airs Graham's bill at the hotel, leaving his wife to pay her own. Later, Rider bought, Airs Graham a ring, and said that if he got a divorce he would marry her. Then petitioner applied for restitution of conjugal rights, as respondent had It'll her, hut the order had not been complied with. “Rider even sold my furniture and took my bicycle from me,' said the petitioner.

A private detective, .Andrew ! fee, said that he had seen Airs Graham go into Rider's hoot shop on the night of April 23rd last. Site had remained there for about half an hour, and then Rider had gone to her house. The next night saw a repetition of the performance, til though Rider left Airs Graham’s house a few minutes after midnight, and on the following night Rider did not leave until after midnight. Graham was not. living at the house, hut was staying at a boardinghouse. Graham had previously taken proceedings against his wife, in Palmerston North.

A decree nisi was granted, with costs on the highest scale. There was some discussion as to ,alimony, the hearing of the application being adjourned until 19 a.m. to-day. [ln reference to the above ease, and the previous all ion Graham v. Graham, Mr Rider informs ns t hat no defence was set up on the understanding that Mrs Graham was to have charge of the children. He also points out that in connection with Airs Rider’s evidence in the nbove case, an advertisement published in the “Herald” of March 22nd sets out the sale of furnituie and household effects by Mrs Rider.]