PORTERS PUNISHMENT.

NZ Truth, Issue 74, 17 November 1906, Page 4

PORTERS PUNISHMENT.

Registers a Marriage That Did *Not Take Place.

The Other Man's Wife Proves Expensive.

A West Coaster named William Porter did a silly aot five years ago, and it was only quite recently that it was found out. A woman got a separation from her husband m the year 1901, and Porter, who was so sweet on the lady that he took her to cohabit with him, thought it was equivalent to a divorce, so he says fa peculiar yarn m these days of enlightenment), and later on, not tiring

of the woman's company, he went along and made a false declaration to the registrar by registering their marriage, which never, took place. That was his way of letting the public know that his partner m sin was an "honest woman." Wonderful phrase that, and seems to mean so much to femininity. However, years afterwards it was discovered by some cat that she wasn't an "honest woman" at all ; that she was simply Porter's concubine, and that the marriage tliat had been registered was a ll thistledown. Eventually the police took a hand, and at the lower court Porter pleaded guilty to swearing to what was false. At tire Supreme Court (Christchurch), when he was

BROUGHT UP FOR SENTENCE, Mr Joyce, of Hokitika, appeared for him, and asked for leniency. He said that the prisoner erred more from ignorance than anything else, thinking that once the woman got a separation order she could marry again. Subsequently he discovered that he couldn't do so. He certainly had made a false declaration

Justice Denniston: "Of a marriage that didn't exist."

Mr Joyce went on to say that the parties had been living together as man and wife ever since ; accused was a hard-working man, and had been earning his living. ■. .

Justice Denniston : "And getting convicted for sly-grog selling ?" The lawyer admitted that a few months ago Porter had been selling stout or some such decoction, and had been mulct m specie to a considerable extent. The Judge said that the prisoner possibly registered the marriage m order to protect the woman, but he shouldn't have done" so. He had dealt with these kind of cases before. If there was no penalty attached to this sort of thing men would break the law with impunity. Proper registration of marriages was requisite, and when false declarations were made, and the perpetrators weren't punished, the whole business resolved itself into a Dositive farce. A fine wouldn't meet the case at all. He thought Porter should he punished with gaol, and he sent accused to Lyttelton for three months. So Porter's little love bird (who is another man's missus) .won't have an opportuniiv of smothering him with her j ca,resses for a whole long quarter of a I year. , _