1. Defendant and complainant lived together as man and wife at various places throughout the country from 1900 down to the early part of 1905; he had sexual intercourse with her during that period, was introduced by complainant as her husband, allowed complainant to use his name and wrote to her under that name. Held, this course of conduct on the part of the defendant was sufficient to constitute a common law marriage when, as here, both of the parties were competent to contract marriage. It also corroborates complainant's testimony that she had been legally married to defendant in 1900.
2. Held, a legal marriage, the second between the parties in 1905, established by the testimony.
PER CURIAM.
The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion filed by Advisory Master Child, in the court of chancery.
For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, PARKER, CASE, BODINE, DONGES, HEHER, PERSKIE, VAN BUSKIRK, KAYS, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, JJ. 13.
For reversal — None.