PUTTING THE BOOT ON!

NZ Truth, Issue 1180, 12 July 1928, Page 7

PUTTING THE BOOT ON!

Adopted Novel Methods When It Game To Punishment

(From "N.Z. Truth's" Special Auckland Representative.) Separation was not what Janet IVilsdn Reid wanted when she brought her husband, Richard Dickson Reid, before Magistrate McKean m the Maintenance Court recently, though her lawyer, Counsel Schrdmtn, alleged persistent cruelty and an intention to fail to maintain her.

JANET, when she entered the wit-ness-box to tell her story of woe, proved to be a woman of some forty- odd winters, but wore a summery wide-brimmed hat of white silk and a warm brown cloak. " • Reid, the defendant m the case, who was represented by Lawyer Simpson, 1b an elderly man with white hair and dipped white moustache, a wood and coal dealer. ' The story of hia unhusbandly treatment of Janet was a long one. A year after their marriage, which took place In 1922, when they lived m Mount Eden Road, his wife alleged that he illtreated her. On one occasion, being a man of somewhat original' temperament, he took one of his, boots off and thrashed her with it, while he had her at the disadvantage of being m : her nightdress. The consequent bruises were shown to Dr. ; yValton. Richard's disciplinary effort's cannot have met with the success he desired, for Jane went on to tell how — three weeks before their, baby was born m 1924 — he gave her another hiding. Further, about the time the baby was born, he stayed out all night. When they moved to Union Street, JStoings did not improve. Although Mrs. Reid looked after "the place" and dealt with the orders for house-warm-ing materials — also spending some £50 on the horne — her ,man, according to her story, was still displeased with her. He continued- to treat- hen jroughly, while his language* was'most objectionable. ; ; '■•'.: ■ ,'■ .:• '■; "-• ' •■*,'» .. Her only respite -would seem to have been when .he went to Russell like any other gentleman m pursuit of swordfish. "He left about £2 for baby -arid me," . said Jane, "and he went away for week-ends; when he returned from that trip, launching, and fishing, •he never said where he was going." But, m spite of his other amuse-' . ments and his sportive instincts, Richard still continued to ill-treat her. Jane was obviously hurt when she recalled to memory how he had taken his mother out picnicking all day, leaving herself and the baby at home. Among other little attentions, he . threw a brick at his better- half when a dispute arose over some coal order^ Further, continued Jane, when she was washing the baby m the washhouse, which, she explained, was also the bathroom,: he picked another row and hit her with his sflst, so that his ' hand bled: "I was afraid he would murder me," she added, "and a man by name of Alderton was called m to act as peacemaker. "That was not all — I had to ring up the hotel to tell him people were wanting him on business . .... . and he gave the boy of four years old a drink at the hotel." "You are quite sure of that?" asked Magistrate McKean. The complainant was quite certain. . ' . There was no end to the peculiar i ways of Richard, she said. He would eleep with his head on the kitchen table, leaving the light on from 2 a.m., and then m the morning would abuse her over the waste of electric light. ;•«* Qn April 13 a woman called to see him. She was drunk, alleged Jane, and called him "Her Dick." "I don't think she's ever sober; they're on very friendly terms." Then, when Reid came home, she threw her arms - around his neck " and called him: "Oh, my Dick!" Yes, his wife had called 'in the police from the Ponsonby ' station as a result of these too frequent happenings, which had gone so far that Richard had given her a black eye. "Half of ray face was bla-ck." Lawyer Schramm askeiL about . Richard's table manners. Jane, who was by now 'provided with a chair m front of the lawyers' table, having shown signs of fairitness as a result of her emotions, replied: "They are -hard to explain— he threw his food on the floor . . . and wanted a newspaper for a table-cover, instead of a starched and ironed tablecloth." "How often has he assaulted you this year?" — "A couple of dozen times." All that her husband had bought for the home was a cot for the baby and some small things; Jane herself had no money or property. ' "He got £300 from me after we were married," she aaid. Though he was doing very good business, he would only offer her £1 a week for herself and child. He owned three motor-trucks and. she considered he was. making £10 a week clear." "You've put up a very beautiful tale," commented Lawyer Simpson, when he rose to refute Jane's allegations. 1 ' He wanted to know,. if this 111-treat-ment had gone on so long, why she had ,fe not left her husband before. ■■.% "I married him against all my brothers and sisters," came the reply, "so I made my bed and I thought^ I'd lie on it. He chased me for thirteen years before I married him." , Jane went on to tell !how Richard [ ■ left home because of "this woman" I coming to the house. L' Th« woman's name she gave as Mrs.

A Slander Action

Table Etiquette

McCormack, who lived m Beresford Street, and had two children. , There followed some talk of a fight between Richard and William Crooks, the son, m which it appeared that the former was knocked about. Medical, certificates were then mentioned and Lawyer Schramm handed one over to his legal friend, saying: "Here's one of 1923." As Lawyer Simpson took it, he passed over another: "and here's another of 1926," which was barely in^the other's hand before he passed up yet another with the remark: "And here's another!" Lawyer Simpson did not pursue this line of cross-examination, but he learned from Jane that a man named Carbines had paid 10/- a week while he stayed m the happy household; also/that there was not "a Mr. Porter" [with them now, but when there had been Richard brought him. •■•■-.. Another man named- Sandham was mentioned, "He had cause to take proceedings against you?" asked Lawyer Simpson. "He fell |n love with my daughter. I don't see what this has to do with this case." However, being advised to answer, Jane replied that Sandham had brought an action for slander against her and had obtained Judgment for £5. "I called him a mongrel," she added. "Then you are capable of using language ryourself ?'.'•; The lawyer look- • ed very, grave. "I didn't know the full. meaning of the word then," came the reply. "Have you some of your hus- ~': „ - band's clothes?" — "He wore my son's clothes for three years; his pyjamas, even." . At this Juncture it " came to light" that the complainant did not want a. separation — only maintenance, at which the bench expressed surprise. Richard's lawyer said that his client wag quite wiljing to have a separation order made out against him. Magistrate - McKean: ' "Why go through all this if he's, willing to take out a separation order?" Lawyer Schramm was compelled to explain that his client was not willing to have a separation order; the bogey of divorce was apparently m the background. Since April, all that Jane had received from her husband was, she said, sometimes £2, £1 or 30/-. And she added: "He has never bought me a costume or anything all the time I've been married to him." Lawyer Schramm, observing that the position was an extraordinary one; pointed out that the husband wanted a separation, but the wife objected, as she was afraid of a divorce at a later stage. Rlohai*d himself then graced the box for a while and told how he , only cleared £4 to £4 10s. a week. ■ His earnings for the last three months had not exceeded £3 16s. a week; his customers .were afraid to come near his premises' because, of his wife's treatment of them. He paid 25/- rent, £2 10s. other household expenses and lighting 4/-. "Why, you are paying more than your income," commented the bench. Richard explained that he had borrowed from his brother and was indebted to him for £115. . ■'. "At present, what can you pay- your wife and child?" asked. Lawyer Simp- ' ' ■ ; ' _, son.— "3o/- a week." The Bench: "That's what you'd like to pay. You think ;they should live on 30/- a week?" — «Tm prepared to take the child." To Lawyer Schramm, defendant explained that he had never told his wife he was clearing .£lO a' week; he'd be only too pleased to make anything hear it. His banking account would not show the state of his finances. He had three trucks; they were not very expensive ones, but one was worn to a standstill. His brother had given him a cheque to Andrews for £100. Something was then said about it ■ being for £85 and his worship, asked Richard to explain the discrepancy be- ; tween the sums mentioned. The husband became a little confused. Anyhow, Richard had not sold his insurance for £75, but for £50; a man McGee owed him about £60," 1 but there was a contra account; all that was owing to him, -he reckoned, was about £10. On the question of the cost of living, as mentioned, defendant said: "That's what's been putting me behind." "That will do," from the bench, dismissed Richard from the elevation of the box. Magistrate McKean then announced that he could not rely upon the statements of defendant. "He should be making, more than he says he has for the last three months." On the question of what would be a fair thing, m the matter of maintenance, Jane's lawyer having stated that "She's been tipped out with nothing," the bench finally fixed the amount to be paid weekly at £2 55., with £13 .back maintenance; the mother to have custody of the child. Costs against Richard- £2 20.