SUED BY WIFE

Hokitika Guardian, 17 December 1931, Page 5

SUED BY WIFE

PEER’S SHORTCOMINGS. ■WIFE’S RINGS PAY FOR HONEYMOON. - ■ ' . ' ■ •’* - ' ' (United Pres? Association. —By Electric Telegraph.—Copyright.) 1 LONDON Dec. 15. Lady Langford summoned Lord Langford for maintenance, at the West London Police Court. Complain- .... ant said that defendant left Dublin in 1922 for London, heavily in debt, and returned in 1923. He went back to Australia and Canada, representing himself' as single. She instituted a divorce ,on J ‘the ground of desertion. While lie was in Australia, Langford wrote asking for forgiveness. She replied that he was a heartless wretch, and had deserted her alter living on her people for many months. She had replied that she would help him if his prospective appointments were particularised, ard suggested that he should contribute to her support. His next letter collie from Australia, promising money when he secured a job. Mr Cairns appearing for Lord .Langford contended that his wife re» fused to accompany him to Australia) which was tantamount to desertion. „ “In 1923,“ continued counsel, “she Wrote, ‘Pill damned if 1 Will live wih you any more, 1 Lord Langford abandoned divorce proceedings* owing to limit of-money.“ Counsel said that Langford had made an affidavit regarding lus career in Canada, including singing in Eskimo territory, tend- “ ing cattle aboard ' ship, and an attempt to make a career as a vocalist at Melbourne. He wrote to his wife in 1926, offering her a home but re- ’ chived ;no reply. He then re-married ■ and returned to England. He then learned that complainant was -.alive. ; Mr Turner Samuels said that Lord Langford wrote,'the story of his life for ;a Sunday newspaper., He could support his’ wife. The lady he had married in -Australia „ should • now be in England, whither she had voyaged in order to join him. Lady, Langford was now living with her mother at Kensington, her brother contributing 'to/the .upkeep of the house. Lord Langford' was staying at Bury Mansions, Jermyn Street, in the West End arid he did not seem to need money. Lady , Langford in her evidence, said that, her ' husband became a. Catholicin order to marry her. He inherited from his mother £3OOO, but was annoyed to find it was subject to a mortgage. 'Witness denied that he invited her to Canada or Australia. She was penniless. Here the witness; [broke down. On resuming she said 1 that Lord Langford defrayed. .th.e...i;os.L«oL,-Jh e “' honeymoon, with 1 her. rings. She had ; Written the story or her life for' the “Daily Express. 'Their _ coming Into ■ thfe Htlh made! her fee) ill, Wnd com- ,• pelted her resignation el a, tshshopl \ pQsitlpn, . ■.> ■ ; . , _ r Mr Cairns agreed that Lady Lang, ford had the right, to stay away from her husband, but said that was not, desertion on his part. > The ca.se was adjourned to January 19th. - ■"■//• *■ ', . ,