Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

Halcombe R.M. Court

Thursday, 27th August, 1886. (Before R. Ward, E.M., and R. Linton, J.P.) An information, laid by Mr Larsen, «f the Halcouibo Hotel, for assault, ■was allowed to be withdrawn, Mr Staite for tlie informant intimating that the case hud been amicably arranged. H. Orabb v. Dalgleisli.— Claim £30. Mr Hawkins for plaintiff. The claim having been proved by Mr E. Crabb, judgment was given for the amount and costs and counsel's fee 2 1 s. Eliza Marsh v. Thomas Marsh.— Claim £35. This was a most interesting matrimonial case, and occupied most of the day, the court room being crowded. Mr Staite for plaintiff, and Mr Hawkins for defendant. The parties, both well advanced in years, got married about a year ago, but after twelve months of connubial bliss, they agreed to differ, and separated by deed. The defendant had a family of grown up sons and daughters of varying ages from 10 to 40. Differences arose between the stepmother and the defendant's family, which culminated in the separation. The plaintiff, Eliza Marsh, now sued to recover £17, money advanced by her to enable defendant to buy horses and saddles to go shearing, and for groceries and drapery, supplied from her shop to the grown up daughters. For the defence it was contended that " The Married Women's Property Protection Act, 1884, gave no right of action in a case of this sort, and further that the horses and drapery were presents resulting from natural love and affection. The E.M., in giving judgment, said the Act quite revolutionised the former law of rights and liabilities of husband and wife. The plaintiff was evidently a shrewd and clever woman, though rather illiterate, and her book keeping was not free from suspicion ; but he held that the defendant was liable to pay for the monsys advanced for horses and saddles, disallowing the other items. Judgment for plaintiff for £ 15, costs 365, and counsel's fee 2 la. The judgment, apparently, gave general satisfaction. The court then adjourned.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/FS18860828.2.21

Bibliographic details

Feilding Star, Volume VIII, Issue 33, 28 August 1886, Page 3

Word Count
336

Halcombe R.M. Court Feilding Star, Volume VIII, Issue 33, 28 August 1886, Page 3

Halcombe R.M. Court Feilding Star, Volume VIII, Issue 33, 28 August 1886, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert