AND JUST LIKE THE IVY ?

NZ Truth, Issue 1187, 30 August 1928, Page 5

AND JUST LIKE THE IVY ?

But She Wasn't' Going to Cling Too Tightly to Samuel (From "N.Z. Truth's" Special Auckland Representative.) A matrimonial triangle does not necessarily imply husband, wife and star boarder. Traditional mother-in-law first sometimes makes the third side. This is a story of a triangle, though unsupported by legal fact.

TVY HELENOR BAKER, a young.wo--1 'man of three years wife-hood, has as good as made up her mind that she' has no further love for her husband and will not live with him again. Hence. she made two applications to the court— the one for maintenance, , separation and guardianship, and the ' other for maintenance and guardianship on the grounds of • persistent cruelly. . "When Lawyer Ormonde Butler called Dr. Usher to certify as to the wife's health, he gave it as his opinion that it Avould be dangerous; for -her to resume married life. Lawyer Singer, who appeared for •■^Samuel Thomas Baker, a carpenter, on hearing this: "If she goes away she can stop away, and we'll keep the child." : The doctor went on to say that the wife was ndt yet m a condition to earn her own living, and that twelve months' rest was desirable. Wi(h that, the young woman herself went into the witness-box to tell ihow, after marriage m 1925, they had lived with her mother at Albany Road until September, 1927. The baby had ar- ■ rived the year following their marriage. She made certain allegations, against Samuel as to his conduct immediately after her return from the •.-nursing: •home. Later she left' him, and she said she might return if lie was a little more considerate. . . Seemingly, Ivy did return for a while, but as v she would not consent to certain things she alleged, that she was kept short of funds, and defendant • .went out at night. "/ After an absence of two weeks she returned once again, Sam saying that he would be different. Whatever possessed Sam is not known, but one night *he told his wife things about his past Jife m Australia: v "I forgave him that," said the complainant, "but he told me something else about women and himself, and these confessions altered my feelings towards him." • • ■ . Questioned as to the bad language Which Sam was accused of using, Ivy asked the bench, where sat Magistrate McKean: "Do, I have to repeat it?" But' she was spared this. Samuel also had a temper, she said. All the cash she had had since May was £2. . Interrogated by Lawyer Singer,who was there for Samuel, Ivy re-^ plied that her'mother's interference was .not the cause of the trouble, though her husband said it was. Her mother had come into the room to defend her once when she had called out. It was because of trouble between herself and her husband that she had left Astiton Road and gqne home to her mother. . Samuel had told her that he would maintain her) but not her mother. As tp writing to him, she had not done' so until he had written to her two or three times, and then she had said she was willing to go back to him if he took a furnished flat. fr Her husband had/refused to speak to her -mother. . > > "Didn't you have all your Husband's wages?" asked Lawyer Singer. "Yes, until the beginning of May, but I didn't spend them all on myself, except when he cut me down. . ." He had "cut her down" six or eight times, it transpired. What's your object m wanting a separation order?— l don't want to live with him. You have stated that ;you' did not want maintenance? — He did, I didn't. Do you propose to go to work? — When baby: is older; I can't now. Ivy was quite positive that she could not live with Samuel again, and she explained that her reason for asking for the order was because she "wanted, things fixed up." Lawyer Singer was most insistent for a reason for the separation order. What was the idea m the back of Ivy's head? he asked. • ■ "Because it's usual; I've no object m view," replied complainant. Didn't your husband say he'd always maintain the child?' — He said I was no further use to ►him and I Could go to — — . ' The wife, .assured, her husband's

lawyer that she '.expected to gain nothing: by the separation order— "but he won't leave me alone," she added; Your idea of having a separation order is .to give you ajl the say? — If he wanted his divorce he. . could have it. . . . I've no desire to divorce him. No, you'd keep him on a string as 1 long as you liked. . . . Most married women know enough about it- for that. ■'-■' Complainant's mother, Mary. Ann Moore, dressed all m black, was then called. She said she was m business on her own, and her son-in-law oad ordered- her out of the house. It was plain that there was no love lost between her son-in-law and herself. Samuel had' used dirty language to her. , • Lawyer Singer: Maybe you've not exposed much affection?— No. '. Witness said she had not interfered, although he had objected to her speaking to the baby. "He's never spoken to me for two years. I've no desire to speak to him," added the lady. Witness said she would be surprised to 'hear that, her daughter felt that • she ,had made a mistake and was wishing, to x-eturn to her husband. She also swore that she had heard her son-in-law say to his wife that 'he Svas sorry that he had injured her. Again Counsel Singer demanded to know why both mother and daughter were so insistent on a separation, and he was told: "Only that she may live quiet!ly alone." Did not witness think that some inducement should be given to bring these two together when they had only been married three years. Wasn't it rather 1 terrible to break their union? urged counsel. . "Not so terrible as the treatment she would get if she went back," answered Mrs. Moore. Further examined by Lawyer Ormonde Butler, witness said she had been called: "A . dirty old skinflint," by : Samuel. This rude remark was the result of conversation over household expenses after his wife came out of'hospital. "A man is at the mercy of his wife and mother-in-law m certain circumstances," remarked Lawyer Singer. Samuel, when he went into.. the wit-ness-box, statett that he was prepared to give his wife a home if she would return to him; and to Lawyer Butler, he denied ail ■the' allegations against him. The suggested reconciliation had not come from him but from his wife. His wife tiad accused him of having a certain disease; he had not accused her. To a question put by the bench, he replied that his wife had said: "I suppose the next -thing you will tell me is that you returned from the war with a certain disease." Ivy, from her place beside her lawyer, interrupted with: "Oh, pardon me." ' . "You" must have had a reason for telling your wife things?" suggested Magistrate McKean. . "She was disdainful," explained Samuel. '.'Arid I thought I'd be the same." ' : '"I stm. not convinced by the absolute denial of the husband," observed the magistrate. "I have more faith m the wife's Statement m this, instance than the husband's." He thought that the wife was entitled to maintenance meanwhile; he would reserve his decision as to separation. An order was Tnade against Samuel for £1 per week, with' costs and past maintenance.. . :