MAINTENANCE CASE.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 3038, 20 May 1926, Page 2

MAINTENANCE CASE.

MAGISTRATE RESERVES , DECISION. The case wherein Mrs Ann O’Reilly sought separation and maintenance orders against Michael Daniel O'Reilly, ex-constable, of Palmerston North, and further asked for the guardianship of the three infant children of the marriage, was continued before Mr. J. L. Stout, S.M., at the Palmerston North Magistrate’s Court yesterday, when, in opposing the applications, Mr Ongley drew attention to the grounds on which they were based —alleged failure and intended failure to maintain, and alleged insobriety. Wiith regard to the first, said counsel, it had been admitted that there had been no failure to maintain, and, further, defendant was perfectly prepared to continue maintaining his wife. In regard to the second ground, there was not the slightest evidence that defendant was an habitual inebriate. For the whole of the seven years he had been in the police force there had been only one occasion when he had been “on the mat” for being the worse for liquor. The real cause actuating the applications was the fact of defendant carrying on with another woman. As it was, defendant’s house and store account were open to complainant, but he could not offer her money at present, as his superannuation had not yet come to 'hand. His Worship pointed out that, although the evidence did not disclose that defendant was an habitual inebriate, the evidence that had been tendered of his drinking habits, plus the very strong evidence of his having gone with other women, was quite sufficient to justify complainant leaving him and refusing to go back.

Mr. Cooper (for complainant) commented that it was impossible to believe that defendant would have been dismissed from the police force for one or even two breaches. In evidence defendant stated that, during the whole of his married life, he had handed his pay to complainant and had never gone out with more than a few shillings, except on occasions when lie had gone to races, when his wife had given him a few pounds. For the past two years his duties had been in the watehhouse, where he had had charge of the books, accounts, vouchers, etc., and these were up-lo-dalle when lie left the force. There had never been any complaint about his writing being shaky. He denied that lie was habitually drunk, although he admitted that he drank. With regard to the incident mentioned by his wife in her evidence on Monday, concerning the burning of his football ciolhes, witness stated that he and' complainant had burned them together, witness pouring kerosene on them. lie had resigned from the police force oil May 3 after refusing to clean out the prisoners’ cells, which work lie considered was not his. Four days later he had been summarily dismissed in consequence of a complaint from his wife to the senior-sergeant that lie was carrying on with oilier women.

Cross-examined, defendant staled that two of t’ne witnesses on Monday had not told the truth concerning him, because, like his wife, they came from England; while another witness was endeavouring to “get one back” on witness because he had once complained to him about his riding a bicycle on the footpath, lie denied that lie had ever been warned for his drinking habits while in the police force, except when he had once been lined. He admitted that he played poker, but denied that ho gambled for bigger stakes than he could afford.

Mr. Cooper: Do you know a certain woman who has marks on her face from the fists of Constable O’Reilly?—No.

Did you ever come home after an afternoon at an hotel with your face bleeding —Not that I remember.

After you got your notice of dismissal, is it correct that you spent the week-end at an hotel with another woman? No; certainly not. Defendant said, in answer to another question, that it was coireet that Mrs O’Reilly had found him in his house with another woman. He denied that the latter had stayed the night at the house. This concluded the case of the defendant, and His Worship reserved his decision.

The first part of this case appears on page 1.