MAINTENANCE

Gisborne Times, Volume XXV, Issue 2115, 25 June 1907, Page 4

MAINTENANCE

A matrimonial difference of opinion was ventilated at tho Police Court yesterday morning betbro Air. AV. A. Barton, S.AI., when Patrick Sullivan was charged with failing _ to provide his children, Julia O’Sullivan, aged three years, and John, aged about throe years, and his wife Hannah with nd'equalL means of support. Air Finn appeared for plaintiff, and Mr, Stock for defendant. Air. Finn, outlining the caso for complainant, said about Alay, 1906, the parties were living at Ormond, and during twelve months her husband bad neglected lier. Airs. O’Sullivan, wife of defendant, deposed she had boon married to him about 19 years, and bad a family ol eight. There were twins, Julia and John, aged tlirco years old about 27th November last. For ten years she resided with her husband. He went away to AA’hntaupoko in February • last year, taking their cattle with him. AA’itness remained at Ormond with the children. She supported .them by getting some cows from her ’neighbors and two from a son. Alortgnged her son’s cattle with bis permission to enable her to buy more cows. They were milked and the milk sent to the factory. AA’lien the cows went dry slie found she could not make a living and slie went back to her husband six weeks ago. He did not give her the necessaries of life, food, vegetables, firewood, etc. Complained to him a few days after she returned that- lie was not supplying her with proper food. He asked for a list- of the stores:she required. She supplied the list, and he brought some of the goods, but. not all she required. He brought her butter, meat, but not sufficient. Also asked defendant for clothes when she had been back about two weeks. He replied that she would have to wait 1 .; Neither the children nor herself (witness) had a change of clothes, and were in that state at present. Also asked for same rugs and blanket,s for the children’s beds, and lie said lie had no money. They had not sufficient bedclotliing, and this had not been supplied. There were three rooms in tho house which were unlined. There were not enough cooking utensils and firewood also was lacking. Two rooms were set apart for bedrooms, and two slept in one of the rooms and eight in the other. Had been ill three times during tlie last six weeks. Asked her husband for sixpence for her lunch. Ho replied that he would not) give her any money. Ho threatened to stop her credit at restaurants and did so. Defendant milked between 50 and 60 cows in summer time . By Afr. Stock: Sued defendant for maintenance about twelve months ago, a’nd tho case was dismissed. Did not refuse to live with her husband. He did not .say that he had a homo for her at AA’hataupoko, and slie refused. The Ormond property was in witness’ name. Had no intention of going back there in tlie spring; nobody was living there now. Some of the furniture was there still. Sold some pumpkins to pay her bills, and received about £l. There was a Shaddock range in the house. Admitted that there was a carpenter at work now, putting up an additional room. Defendant owned 100 acres leasehold there, and paid 25s per acre rent. Did not know if he had to pnv cost of fencing. Had no idea of what defendant’s average earnings per month. AA’ent to Teat and Friar’s for goods amounting to about-’ £l2. An account showed that 59 loaves of bread bad been consumed between Alay 18th and 31st, and from June Ist’to 19th, they had 57 loaves. There were plenty of potatoes, but not enough meat. Admitted that a steer was killed last Saturday. Re-examined by Air. Finn: The Ormond property consisted of 15 acres, rental £l4 10s per annum. It was a Government lease. AA’itness had always paid the rent- from tho proceeds of the milk sales, etc. . For the defence Air. Stock called

Emmet O’Sullivan, son of complainant, stated that defendant paid 25s per acre for tlio leasehold, and had to do tlie fencing. The latter cost about £BO. They bad 18 cows in milk at present, and 13 they milk twice a day. For the present month their receipts were £3O gross takings, and this was being reduced during the winter months. AViriiess’ mother had complained the day after she returned, that- she was not getting sufficient. The accounts had been in witness’s possession, and the goods had ben obtained for the house. There was a stove, two saucepans, frying pan, kettle, teapot, etc. There was plenty of firewood about. People bad been given permission to remove some to prevent its rotting.' His mother had been absent from the bouse about three days in the week on an average. AVitness arose between 3 and 3.30 a.ni and while slie was away lie bad to cook bis own meals. Complained about- this, and she said that, slie would go wherever she wanted,' to. Objected to lier going to the restaurants for meals, as ho did not get any when lie went home. He was satisfied with the bedclotliing in tlie house. By Air. Filin: Ho counted seven blankets on his, mother’s bed and three on the children’s bed. AA'hen she complained witness suggested that some of the blankets should be taken off her bed and placed on the children’s.

Patrick O’Sullivan, defendant, deposed that when Ills wife returned in Alav. 1906, she told him she required clothes and goods, and went with her to Teat and Friar’s. There was plenty of firewood close bv. There were too many bedclothes, lie thought, and the children had three or four. He had told his wife to give some of tlie clothes to the children.

By Air. Finn: Did not give his wife all she wanted, as she would buy the shop. There seemed no limit to Ivor purchases. He got all lie could, and promised more the following month. Always supplied sufficient firewood for the day. This concluded tlio evidence.

: His Worship said that from the evidence it-appeared that complainantand tbe children bad reasonable maintenance, and lie did not think she had anything to complain of. Tlio case came up some time ago when the wife was living at Ormond, and she refused to come to AVbataupoko, and now she came down and made further trouble. Tbe complaint was dismissed.