|
Dorma Leigh was born in Camberwell, London, as Dorothy Mabel Woodley, in 1890 (probably on 11 November). She was the daughter of Ernest Woodley and his wife, Fannie Wellesley Hack. Ernest was 10 years younger than Fannie and they later separated. According to descendants of Dolly’s brother, her father cut her out of his will because she “went on the stage”. She married Peter Cheyney on 27 November 1919 in the registry office at St Giles. On the marriage certificate she gives her profession as a theatrical producer, Peter was listed a ‘company director’ and his father, ‘of independent means’. The marriage was not a happy one and there were no children. Peter left in 1923 and, later that year, Dorothy petitioned for the restitution of conjugal rights. This was ordered in October 1923 but never complied with. Peter petitioned for divorce in 1930 with Dorothy as respondent and Haddon John Southby Cave (an out of work actor/ theatrical agent) as co-respondent. They were charged with committing adultery between May 1926 and June 1930. Both Peter and Dorothy admitted adultery; Dorothy admitted committing adultery during one week in1926 at Campden Hill Road. Peter’s petition was denied but a Decree Nisi was granted to Dorothy; Peter had to pay costs. The Decree Absolute was granted in Jan 1932 (see below for transcript).
Dorothy’s mother died in November 1818 (leaving Dorothy all of her estate apart from £150 and a ring which went to Dolly’s brother, Cecil) . At that time she was appearing as a dancer in Whirligig, a revue running at the Palace Theatre. On 5 November 1927 Dolly was knocked down by a car near Notting Hill Gate tube station. She sustained a broken ankle and a deformity of the foot which permanently incapacitated her from following her profession. On 11 July 1928 she was awarded damages of £500 from the driver, Mr David Burney, of Elsworthy Rd, Regents Park. At the time she was living at 109 Campden Hill Road, W8 (from a report in The Times 12 July 1928.) A month later, Dolly’s father, Ernest, died. She was not mentioned in his will.
Dorma made her first stage appearance at Daly’s Theatre, London, as a dancer on 20 May 1911 in The Count of Luxembourg with Bertram Wallis and Lily Elsie. She next appeared at the same theatre in the English version of Franz Lehar’s Gipsy Love (1 June 1912) dancing with Jan Oyra; Robert Michaelis and Gertie Millar played the leading parts. Leigh and Oyra were next in the musical play The Girl on the Film (Gaiety Theatre, London, 5 April 1913), with George Grossmith, Emmy Wehlen and Connie Ediss. Dorma Leigh as Linda (a part originally played in London by Madeleine Seymour) and Oyra as Doddie (in which he had succeeded Robert Nainby in the London production) then toured in America in the same piece. (On 6 December 1913 Dorma sailed to New York on the Mauretania. She travelled saloon or first class and arrived 12 December. There were two other actresses listed with her: Gertrude Birch and Madelaine Seymour). They were all due to appear at the Casino Theatre in NY. Returning to London she and Oyra began appearing at various variety theatres, notably the Coliseum. They were next together again in the musical play Tina (Adelphi Theatre, 2 November 1915) with Godfrey Tearle and Phyllis Dare. During the next few years Dorma Leigh spent touring, but was back again in London on 23 December 1919 to appear in The Whirligig, a revue, at the Palace Theatre. She then danced in Via Crucis (Garrick Theatre, 5 February 1923), and The Street Singer (Lyric Theatre, 27 June 1924), the successful musical comedy with Harry Welchman and Phyllis Dare. Dorma Leigh’s last known appearance was as Manuella in The Gusher, ‘a play of mystery and adventure’ (Princes Theatre, London, 31 July 1937), with Bernard Lee, Jack Livesey, Alistair Sim, Joan Hickson and Coral Browne.
There are 15 photograhic portraits of Dorothy (Dorma Leigh - DORothy MAbel WoodLEY) in the archives of the National Portrait Library taken by Bassano; dated May 1912 and January 1916. Some are with Jan Oyra, her dancing partner.
From old phone books Dorma Leigh is listed:
1913 – 1916 - 103 Jerningham Road;
1916 – 6 Burleigh Mews, W;
1918 – 11 Talbot House, St Martin's Lane, WC2;
1925-24 – 26 Campden Hill Gdns, W8;
1931-35 – West Cromwell Rd, SW5.
|
|
|
|
DIVORCE DOCUMENTS
Cheyney, Dorothy Mabel v Cheyney, Reginald Evelyn Peter Southouse
(Restitution of Conjugal Rights)
1st June 1923
The humble petition of Dorothy Mabel Cheyney, Actress.
1. That your Petitioner then Dorothy Mabel Woodley, spinster was on the 27th day of November 1919 married at the Register Office in the Registration District of St Giles, London to Reginald Evelyn Peter Southouse Cheyney
2. That after the said marriage your Petitioner lived and cohabited with her said husband at divers places and at 46 Acacia Road, St John's Wood in the County of London.
3. That there has been no issue of the said marriage.
4. That your Petitioner lives at 27 York St, Baker St, London W.
5. That the said Reginald Evelyn Peter Southouse Cheyney is a Costumier and resides at 54 Burton St, London and that he is domiciled in England.
6. That there have been no previous proceedings in this Division with reference to the said marriage.
7. That the said REPSC did on the 27th day of January 1923 withdraw from cohabitation with your Petitioner and has kept and continued away from her without any just cause whatsoever and from then he has refused and still refuses to render her conjugal rights.
Your Petitioner therefore humbly prays that you will be pleased to decree her:
1. Restitution of conjugal rights
2. Such further and other relief as is meet.
Greenfield and Cracknell, 1 Clements Inn, Strand.
Filed 7 Jun 1923.
****************************
I Dorothy Mabel Cheyney of 27 York St, Baker St actress make oath and say as follows:
That the statements contained in the paragraphs 1,2,3,4,5, 6 & 7 of my said petition dated 1st day of June 1923 are true.
That on various occasions between the 27th day of January 1923 and the 15th day of March 1923 I verbally asked my husband REPSC to return to me but he always refused to do so and that on the 15th March 1923 I wrote and sent to him by registered post a letter a true copy of which is now produced and shown to me marked "A" and on the 17th day of March 1923 I received the letter in reply from him now produced and shown to me marked "B".
That there is no Collusion or Connivance between me and my husband REPSC in any way whatsoever.
WRCR Greenfield & Cracknell filed for restitution of conjugal rights 7 Jun 1923.
****************************
23 June 1923 Petitioner filed 1 citation with 3 affidavits of, search and service and to fix venue.
****************************
Decree restitution of conjugal rights before Rt Hon Sir Henry Edward Duke Knight, the President sitting at the Royal courts of Justice, Strand on 19 October 1923 Cheyney DM against Cheyney REPS.
The President having taken the oral evidence of the Petitioner in support of the petition filed in this cause and having heard counsel thereon by his final decree pronounced that the Petitioner had sufficiently proved the contents of the said petition and that REPSC the Respondent and DMC the Petitioner were and are lawful husband and wife and ordered that the said Respondent do within 14 days from the service of the Order on him return home to the Petitioner and render to her conjugal rights, and within alike time file in the Divorce Registry a certificate that he has done so and condemned the said Respondent in the costs incurred and to be incurred on behalf of the said petitioner in this cause.
Decree 19 Oct 1923
Cheyney, Reginald Evelyn Peter Southouse v Cheyney, Dorothy Mabel & Haddon Cave
(Dissolution of Marriage)
27 June 1930
Petition for divorce between Reginald Evelyn Peter Southouse Cheyney Petitioner and Dorothy Mabel Cheyney Respondent and Haddon Cave Co-Respondent in the matter of the Petition of REPSC for dissolution of marriage.
I REPSC of 56 Welbeck St W1 say my Petition is all true sworn 26 June 1930
Petitioner and Respondent both admit adultery.
(The following is in note form)
1. Marriage etc.
2. Cohabited in Cheniston Gdns, Ken and finally at 46 Acacia Rd etc.
3. No issue etc.
4. Petitioner resides at 56 Welbeck St and is a journalist. Respondent resides at 61 Cromwell Rd, Earls Ct
5. June 23 Restitution of Conjugal Rights. Such an order has never been complied with.
6. That the said Dorothy Mabel Cheyney has frequently committed adultery with Haddon Cave.
7. That from the month of May 1926 to Nov 1927 at 109 Campden Hill Rd Kensington aforesaid the said DMC lived cohabited and habitually committed adultery with the said Haddon Cave.
8. That from the month of June 1928 down to the present time at 61 West Cromwell Road the said DMC has lived cohabited and habitually committed adultery with the said Haddon Cave.
9. That on several occasions from the year 1923 to the year 1926 your Petitioner committed adultery with one Margaret Roxburgh at divers addresses.
Petitioner humbly prays for
1. A dissolution of the said marriage
2. Such further and other relief as is meet.
Petitioner’s Statement:
The Petitioner who was wounded in the war, in the ear and head, and has suffered and still suffers great pain, and therefore is unable to stand any great strain, was married to the Respondent a few weeks after his first introduction to her, she being five years his senior. The parties did not live happily together.
In the early part of the year 1922 the Petitioner started a business as a costumier in New Oxford St in conjunction with a Mrs Margaret Roxburgh, under the name of “Reginald”. shortly after the commencement of this business, the Respondent, who has a short and hasty temper, made a remark suggesting that the Petitioner and Mrs R were committing adultery but at the time there was no truth in the suggestion.
In Jan 1923 the Respondent was so worrying and annoying to the Petitioner that he had to leave her, and that he has not cohabited with her since 27 Jan 1923.
On 1 June 1923 the Respondent filed a Petition for Restitution of Conjugal Rights and an other was made on 19 Oct 1923 such order has never been obeyed and no effort has been made to enforce it.
Some time between June and Dec 1923 the Petitioner told Mrs R of these proceedings and adultery commenced between them. This adultery took place occasionally on dates which the Petitioner is now unable to give and at the following addresses:- Guildford St, Russell Sq and at the Grand Hotel Montmartre, Paris up to the middle of the year 1926. Since this time no adultery has taken place between them.
The Respondent was fully aware to the said adultery as it has come to the Petitioner’s knowledge that she was informing his friends of it and even took them to his Mother.
****************************
The Respondent in answer saith:
She admits that she has committed adultery with the Co-Respondent and says that the Petitioner has by his conduct conduced thereto.
Particulars of conduct conducing:
The Petitioner deserted the Respondent on 26 Dec 1922 and disobeyed a decree for Restitution of Conjugal Rights dated 19 Oct 1923. The Respondent as a result finally committed adultery with the Co-Respondent.
The Petitioner has committed adultery.
Particulars of adultery:
The Respondent relies on the admission of adultery contained in the Petition herein wherefore the Respondent prays:
That the courts will be pleased to exercise its discretion in her favour and grant her a decree dissolving her marriage with the Petitioner and such other order as may be just.
****************************
Statement of facts on behalf of the Respondent:
After the marriage the Respondent lived with the Petitioner at various addresses until 26 Dec 1922 when he left her and went to live with another woman named Mrs Roxbury. This is the woman referred to in Paragraph 9 of the amended Petition with whom the Petitioner admits committing adultery but her name is there spelt Roxburgh.
The Petitioner made a verbal arrangement to pay his wife $2 a week. The payments were made through her Solicitors.
The payments were not made weekly but from time to time and soon got into arrears. From 1926 no payments have been made at all. It is understood that a considerable sum is due to the Solicitors who made some of the said payments to the Respondent on the Petitioner’s promise to reimburse them, which he has not done.
On 19 Oct 1923 the Respondent obtained an order for Restitution of Conjugal Rights against her husband. Said order was duly served but not obeyed.
While married to the Petitioner the Respondent supported herself out of her earnings and savings as an actress. The Petitioner sold or pawned all the Respondent’s jewellery, furniture etc. to provide money for his own purposes and then left her. Since her husband deserted her she has supported herself with the exception of the sums paid through her Solicitor above referred to.
In April 1924 the Respondent was introduced to the Co-Respondent, Haddon Cave, who was then running a theatrical agency with a view to Cave finding her theatrical employment. They remained acquaintances only until June 1926 when the resp who had been living alone at various addresses went to live in one room at Campden Hill Road with the Co-Respondent. they remained there until Sept 1928 when she moved to West Cromwell Rd. Cave, who is an actor, but is mostly out of work, went to live with her there but apart from very occasional work on the films he was supported by the Respondent. He has no means. They have not lived together since these proceedings were commenced.
In 1928 the Respondent met with a serious accident and was ill for a long time. She is at present out of employment.
Dated 11 March 1931.
DMC the Respondent.
****************************
REPSC disputed paragraph 1 of the Respondent’s statement of facts (above).
****************************
On 11 March 1931 REPSC is ordered to pay DMC alimony of £1 per week from 2 July 1930.
****************************
On 26 may 1931 REPS is ordered to pay to DMC within 14 days £33 10s 11d being the amount of the Respondent’s costs and he is further ordered to pay within 14 days the sum of £40 estimated as sufficient to cover the Court costs and expenses of the Respondent. (He was also ordered to pay some other sums.)
****************************
Decree Nisi before the Rt Hon Lord Merrivale (President)
On 2nd July 1931 Cheyney against Cheymey and Cave the President having taken the oral evidence of the Petitioner and of the witnesses produced on his behalf in support of the Petition filed in this cause and having taken the oral evidence of the Respondent and of the witness produced on her behalf in support of her answer to the said Petition and having heard Counsel thereon on behalf of the Petitioner and Respondent the Co-Respondent not defending the suit at the hearing pronounced that the Petitioner had not sufficiently proved the contents of the said Petition and dismissed the prayer to the said Petitioner and pronounced that the Respondent had sufficiently proved the contents of the said answer and in the exercise of the discretion vested in the Courts under section 178 (3) of the Supreme Court of Judicature (consolidation) Act 1925 decreed that the marriage had and solemnized on 27 Nov 1919 at the Registry Office St Giles between REPSC and DMC be dissolved by reason that since the celebration thereof the said Petitioner has been guilty of adultery unless sufficient cause be shown to the Court why this decree should not be made Absolute within 6 months from the making thereof it is ordered that the sum of £25 be paid out of the sum lodged in court as security for the Responent’s costs to the Solicitor for the Respondent after Decree Absolute and that the balance of the said sum be paid out to the Petitioner forthwith.
Petition filed notice and affidavit for Decree Absolute 26 Jan 1932
****************************
Petition filed 27 Jun 1930
Cause set down 27 Mar 1931
Husband's Decree dismissed 2 July 1931
Decree Nisi for Wife on answer 2 July 1931
Final Decree 1 Feb 1932
|
|
|
