MAINTENANCE CASE.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXVII, Issue 1478, 27 November 1915, Page 3

MAINTENANCE CASE.

WANKLYN v. WANKLYN. The case in which Gertrude Adelaide Wanklyu proceeded against her husband, Cyril Bernard Wanklyn, for (1) having failed to provide her with adequate maintenance (2) having been guilty of persistent cruelty to her and her children and (3) with being an habitual inebriate, wherefore she asked that a separation order, maintenance order and guardianship order be made in her favour, which was partly heard at the last sitting of the Coirt and adjourned until yesterday, an order for the payment of 30s per week being made in.the meantime, was continued at yesterday’s sitting of the Magistrate’s Court, before Mr J. W. Poynton, S.M. Mr H. R. Cooper appeared for complainant, and Mr Gifford Moore for defendant.

The complainant, whose evidence in general was taken at the previous sitting of the Court, was cross-examined by Mr Moore, under which she stated that her husband had illtreated her for some considerable lime, this treatment having been worse since they returned to Foxton from Tokomaru some three months ago. He struck her on a number of occasions. On one occasion, when living at Tokomaru, she. left him on account of ilkreatment and came to Foxton, but his mother persuaded her to return. He repeatedly caine home drunk. Since returning to Foxton he only gave her £2 a lortnight although his earnings were good, for one fortnight his cheque being 2s. At Tokomaru he gave her from £6 to £j a fortnight. She denied ever saying that she was going to show her husband’s family up. Her mother-in-law had never done anything for her, but was good to her eldest child, but not the younger one. She never used bad language, and denied saying she was going to get an allowance and go to Sydney. She bad had to wear her sister-in-law’s old clothes.

To Mr Cooper : She never ran up any accounts. When defendant advertised that he would not be responsible for any debts contracted in his name she was short of food in the house and her neighbours had helped her. She had also gone out scrubbing to get money. Defendant’s father gave her some money, and friends helped her with food. Constable Woods, in evidence, stated that Mrs Wanklyu complained to him of her husband’s treatment. Defendant frequented the hotels on Saturday afternoons and evenings, and he had often seen him under the influence of liquor, but not drunk. For the defence Mr Moore called the defendant, who stated that he had been marred for four years, and there were two children. Complainant was very cruel to the children, neglected them, and did not teed them, witness having repeatedly to give them their food. She also called them filthy names. On one occasion she held the baby’s hand on the range and burned it. She neglected to keep the children clean. He denied that he ever lost time through drink. Whilst in Tokomaru his earnings averaged ,£3 12s gd per week, and he gave his wife practically the dot. Since they returned to Foxton he had given her about per week. She had threatened to run up accounts, and for that reason he put in a notice that he would not be responsible for debts contracted in his name. His wife never complained to him about lack of clothing. The home was there for her, but if she would not return be asked for custody of the children, of whom he was very fond.

Agnes Wanklyu, mother of defendant, said that complainant and her husband lived with her for about eighteen months, and next door to her for about fifteen months. They got on very well together, and complainant never said anything to her about being illtreated. Complainant was very rough with the children. Nellie Rowe stated that she and her husband lived in the same house as complainant and defendant at Tokomaru for some time, and she never saw them quarrel during that time. Complainant was very hot-tempered, afid did not treat her child as she should do.

William Rowe stated that Wanklyn was not a drunkard. He was very steady, and never lost any time through drink. Joe Cole said that Mrs Wanklyn was well treated while at Tokomaru, and got practically all of delendant’s earnings. She did not keep the children clean and care tor them as she should.

Eugene Perry, storekeeper, Tokomaru, stated that complainant and defendant lived well when at Tokomaru. In conversation with him, complainant always spoke well of defendant’s mother. This concluded the evidence. The Magistrate said he was sorry to see such a young couple in the Court. He ■ wished to say that he didn’t think Mrs Wanklyn had any desire whatever to show up the family. The family appeared to be of that opinion, but he was satisfied it was not so. She had said nothing whatever about the family, and any reference to them was .only made in answer to the cross examination by defendant’s counsel. > In fairness to defendant he would point out that there was no proof that he illtreated complainant. In reference to the supplies of food and clothing, the Magistrate said there was something on complainant’s side. Her action was not that of a woman who intended to get away to Sydney, because if she bad so intended there is no doubt

she would have supplied herself well with clothing, and this she had not done. He thought the whole trouble was brought about by drink, defendant spending too much of his time in the public houses. He would not make an order of separation or an order as to the custody of the children. The children could remain as they were at present, the elder boy with defendant’s mother and the younger one with complainant. An order was made for the payment by defendant to complainant of £i per week for her own maintenance and 10s per week for the maintenance of the child, with costs £2 2S.