AN UNUSUAL CASE.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 2481, 16 September 1922, Page 4

AN UNUSUAL CASE.

CLAIM AGAINST PUBLIC.

TRUSTEE

JUDGEMENT FOR DEFENDANT

Christchurch, Last Night

One of the most unusual eases over brought before the Supreme Court was heard before Mr Justice Adams to-day. Emma. Frances Lewis, of New Brighton, claimed from the Public Trustee us administrator of the estate of Edward Elliott, labourer, the sum of £1,189. Plaintiff, a middle-aged woman, contended in a statement of claim that she had lived with Elliott for thirteen years as his wife, but as Elliott had fraudulently given her a ring, which he said would be sufficient to make the couple man and wife, she had not known that he had a wife in England. She claimed £IOB as wages earned when site had worked at an hotel at Clyde with her “husband” as a married couple, £3 for work done at Rangiora, £4 for work done for one G. Andrews, £338 as housekeeping wages for thirteen years at 10/- a week and £O7O as wages paid by plaintiff to deceased, earned by her own outside work.

The statement of defence pleaded concubinage and the Statute of Limitations.

Counsel said that plain!ilf was an illiterate woman and had not understood the importance of the marriage ceremony. She had asked deceased for a certificate, but lie had stiid that everything would be all right. She had kept house for thirteen years as his wife and had done outside work, the proceeds of which she had given to Elliott. Counsel admitted that the claim was an unusual one.

Evidence was given on behalf of defendant that no secret of the relations existing between plaintiff and Elliott was made by either parly. and that Elliott had spoken openly of his wife and family in England.

His Honour, in giving judgment for defendant, said lie could not close his eyes to the fact that the circumstances showed, when she went to Elliott that the relations established might have been brought about by other means, namely that of fraud.

No costs were applied for and it v.as announced that Elliott’s son had expressed willingness to rectify the wrong done plaintiff.