RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume VIII, Issue 2350, 13 October 1870, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

This Day, (Before A. C. Strode, Esq., R.M.) AFFILIATIONS. Rihzlcy v. Meagher.—Mr Harris for the plaintiff. The defendant was charged with having neglected to contribute to the support of an illegitimate child. The defendant admitted being the father of the child, but Slid that being out of employment he was unable to pay anything towards its support His Worship made an order that he should pay 10s a we k, at the same time observing that, although that was the limit by the old law, in some cases that amount was not sufficient.

Harper v. Mason.—The defendant was charged with neglecting to provide for the maintenance of an illegitimate child. Mr Harris for the plaintiff. The complainant, who is a widow, said she became acquainted with the defendant three years ago last Jnly. Mrs Cornish lived next door. The defendant was in the habit of visiting hj r house repeatedly from July to the beginning of the following year. She and he used to walk out together, and she had been to church with him. He promised marriage, and induced her to give up a portion of her house, which she let at Ss a week, in anticipation of it. The intimacy continued until the defendant left for the Fiji Islands, previously to which he was iu gaol for debt. From the gapl she received two letters from the defendant, and iu consequence A'isited him there. He remained there a month or five weeks, and on being released on the 3rd March he paid her 1 a visit, and continued to visit her until the 3rd April, 1808. He left for the Fijis on the sth April. He wrote to her from Lyttelton and from the Fijis. The last letter received was by post, and c urtained the following passages If I had hoot I would send for you, for I think you could get on well here. I hope yon are not in the family way, as you seemed to fancy. If you are I must send for you. If you arc you must sell out and come here. My dear lassie, there is nothing will give me greater pleasure than to see you here. I think it will be better for you to stop until I see how I like the place. 1 would give all the world to have you beside me.” On the 3rd March an improper intimacy began, and a child was born on the 24th November. Mr Catomore cross-questioned the complainant as to her mode of living and means of maintaining her two children by her former husband and the one born to the defendant. She said she maintained herself by washing, and that she had great difficulty in obtaining a livelihood, Mary Ann Cornish had lived in Leith street, and had known Mrs Harper seven years. She was a very quid, industrious 'person, of whom she never knew anything wrong. She had frequently seen the defendant at the complainant’s house, both during the day and in the evening. She jjearef him offer Mrs Harper marriage, and proposed that the marriage should ho by special license before the Registrar. A witness named Wistlakehad known the complainant for seven years before her husband’s death. He knew the defendant, and had accompanied him to the complainant s house. Ho considered Mrs Harper a hard-working, respectable woman. The paternity was not disputed, but Mr Catomore urged that the complainant was in a position to contribute to the raaintainance of the child. His Worship said, if she had the custody of the child, she did contribute. Defendant was ordered to pay to the complainant 10s a week for the maintenance of the child, and the costs of the proceedings.