COURT PUZZLE

NZ Truth, Issue 1206, 10 January 1929, Page 5

COURT PUZZLE

Was Norman Coe Maintaining His Wife or His Child? STRANGE DIVORCE ECHO (From "N.Z. Truth's" Special Wellington Representative). When a wife receives a court separation from her husband, her spouse is generally obliged to pay something towards her support. But when the wife subsequently obtains a divorce and then remarries, it is not often that the former husband continues compliance with the maintenance order made before the divorce.

MORMAN COE, of Wellington, de- ' clared himself to be such a husband as that when he was haled . before Magistrate Salmon for disobedience of a. maintenance order.

Lawyer A. B. Slevwright, who appeared for the discomfited Coe, stated that his client's wife, Pearl. Coe, received maintenance and separation orders against her husband m June, 1922. The subsequent divorce was decreed absolute m March; 1926. The woman married Leonard Alfred' Palmer m April, 1927

The maintenance order, said counsel, was paid until April 16, 1928, about £52 being overpaid — paid by Norman Coe for the maintenance of another man's wife.

On September 4, 1928, an information was signed by a clerk m the firm of Leicester, Jowett and Rainey, on behalf of Pearl Coe, for the issue of a summons for £20 arrears, at the = rate of £ 1 a week, up to September 3, 1928.

"Coe," went on counsel, "did not appear, and an order was made by your worship on November 26 of this year for two months' imprisonment, Coe to be released on payment. of arrears." . ,

Early m the present month a request was sent by Mrs. Palmer's solicitors for the issue of a warrant of arrest. Lawyer Leicester; said Coe's counsel, acted for her when she; got her divorce. Pearl Coe ceased

to exist when she married Palmer. The firm must have known that the woman married Palmer, and, ha.d his worship known, he would not have made the order. "The money paid, I claim has been paid by Leicester, Jowett and Rainey, who collected it, to Mrs. Palmer," added Lawyer Siev-r wright. Lawyer Leicester refuted the statement that anything improper had been done. "My friend is the only solicitor m Wellington who would come here and make allegations without first ascertaining the facts," he said. "When the separation order was first made, the order for maintenance was made m favor of the child, and Coe knew of this always." Magistrate Hunt made the order,., and he followed out ■ his usual . practice ;in cases where the child .is very, young, of placing the order m the name of the mother. When the divorce went through it was definitely understood that the maintenance of the child should continue. After further legal argument, his worship agreed to suspend the warrant until January 21, or until such time as the matter was settled. So it has been left to a, later date to decide whether Coe has been/ paying maintenance to another man's' wife or merely supporting his own child.