Reproduced from Liverpool Daily Post 16 May 1864 in case of use or interest to anyone INVERARITY v. HOWES, FALSELY CALLED INVERARITY. Mr. M. Chambers, Q.C., and Mr. Hance appeared for the petitioner; Mr. F. H. Lewis and Mr. Searle for the respondent. The petitioner prayed for a decree of nullity on the ground of a previous marriage of the respondent. It was proved that the respondent, then Rosa Symons, was married to Edward Howes, at Charlton, in 1845, that in 1857 she went through the ceremony of marriage with the petitioner at Westminster, and that Edward Howes is still living. After the supposed marriage the petitioner and respondent had cohabited in New Zealand until the fact of first marriage was disclosed to the petitioner by a servant, and it was discovered that the first husband was alive. They then ceased to cohabit. These facts were not disputed on behalf of the respondent, but it was stated that when she contracted the second marriage she had lost sight of Howes for several years, and she had every reason to believe that he was dead. The jury found a verdict for the petitioner, and the Court pronounced a decree of nullity. The second groom was William David Inverarity (transcribed as Inverarily on FreeBDM) Rowan Gibbs