Wife’s Maintenance Claim

Hokitika Guardian, 6 February 1923, Page 3

Wife’s Maintenance Claim

[by TELECItAFU —TER PRESS ASSOCIATION] WELLINGTON February 5.

Howard Nat trass, motor dealer, was proceeded against by his. wife in the Magistrate’s Court for separation, maintenance and guardianship orders. Counsel for the plaintiff said the. partie.-, had been living apart. A separation bad been arranged in 1919, following on the ease "herein Nattrass was the defendant in an action iur seduction. and £2O per month maintenance was paid for some time, but this ceased early in 1921. In April. 1922. fresh deeds were arranged, whereby the plaintiff was to receive certain benefits from a patent which the delendcnt went to America to exploit. Payments were made till November. Tlieri they ceased. The defendant returned to New Zealand at the New Year, and the plaintiff commenced proceedings to recover maintenance. List Friday the syndicate with which the delendaiit is connected paid up the maintenance due under the dyed, after being threatened with legal proceedings. Counsel said the defendant had a large number of valuable shares in the patent, and yet the maintenance had been reduced from £29 to £lO month-

Tlie defendant, in evidence, said ho had always been willing to maintain liis w'fo. He explained his financial position. He denied that lie was keeping the young woman who was concerned m the former proceedings. Mr Watson, counsel for plaintiff, a*keil: -“Where is she?” ■‘Sire is living with my sister.” ‘‘You were deported from America,

weren’t you?” "Tlint’s a lie! T might make you

prove what you say!” ‘Wen- you not arl'-lcd and --out over ilu- other side?” "It’s a lie.” “You were once convicted in this imirt as a rogue and a vagabond weren’t you?” "‘That’s another lie. Yon have got your knife into me and you are only tln-owing mud !" “Don’t talk (o me like that, t say you were convicted in this court for being a. rogue and a vagabond!” “And I say that it is a lie.” Further similar cross.examination followed, "ml the Magistrate interjected ; -‘-This man is quite capable of earning his living, and it is Ii is duty to look after Lis wife and child, before lie looks after any other lady. I order that lie pays C 3 per week tor liis wife and £1 for his child.’ There was further discussion on the question el security, and decision on this point was held over lor one month. Defendant in the meantime is to make in advance payment of £lO.