EXTRAORDINARY CASE OF CRUELTY TO A WIFE.

Patea Mail, Volume II, Issue 168, 18 November 1876, Page 2

EXTRAORDINARY CASE OF CRUELTY TO A WIFE.

(From the Australasian.) An illustration—let us hope it is a most exceptional one—of married life iu Ballarat, was brought before the City Bench recently, which for . tyranny, cruelty, and childish folly exceeds anything written by any of the liveliest writers of fiction. The case Was that of Cord tikes v. Cordukes, in which the complainant, Louisa Cordukes, aged scarcely 16 years, the mother of one child, and bearing another, sued Richard

Charles Cordukes, her husband, aged about 54, and described as a chemist, for maintenance—alleging gross cruelty and ill-treatment as the basis of hoi' application. Her evidence went to show that in May last she had to leave her husband on the ground of cruelty, but as he promised to be good to her, she was induced to go back and live with him. She had not long returned when the same system of cruelty was resumed. According to her statement it required very little to excite her husband's auger, and whenever he got out of temper he refused to speak to her until she had placed a letter on his plate at table, coim (aining a written apology and begging forgiveness, la laet, though living together, all their communications with each oilier were for lengthened periods carried on iu writing. The cruelty he practised ou her was pinching and squeezing her limbs,, pulling her ears, and slapping her face, without what she considered the slightest provocation. On one occasion since the first breach occurred there was a list of the clothes to be sent to the wash made out. On looking over it he complained that the name of one of the articles wa^ppproperly spelled. She, on the otMT hand, argued that he was wrong, until he got so angry that he ordered her not to enter his bedroom for a fortnight. He took her to a small room in the house, and locked her in there without any bedding, and with only a sofa, a small table, and a chair, her shawl being the only article she had to wrap round her at night. The window of the room was so small that she could not get out of it, but it was fortunately low enough to permit anyone from the outside to pass anything into her. For four days and nights Cordukes gave her nothing but bread and water, but she managed to let her sister know her position, and she supplied her with meat, bread, butter, ■■ tea, coffee, &c., unknown to her husband. Finding that she wrapped Imrself up iu her shawl at night, he deprived her of that article, on the second day, and seeing that she had used the table-cover as a wrapper afterwards, he also took that away from her, and it was only after a number of days of such imprisonment, and a threat from her friends to punish him, that lie let her out, still denying her access to his room. Recently he gave her half-a-crown to purchase some ribbons, but learning that- a friend of her husband was coming to see him', and knowing there was scarcely anything iu the house, she appropriated the money to the purchase, of some biscuits, cheese, butter, &c. On learning that she had done so, he got into a great rage, struck heron the nose,, making it bleed freely,, shipped her face, tore the rings out of her cars, and hurt her very much,- ami it was for this last cruelty that.she took proceedings against him now. The .defemhid, while not denying that he had exercised what he called a wholesome “ corrective/’ system in his household,and justifying his conduct, said his wile had exaggerated the treatment she had received.- He denied having struck her mi the' nose .and tearing the rings from her ears, but after being pressed, ho admitted having “ taken” them from

her. In answer to counsel, lie said lie tvas a piously-inclined man; that lie \visbcd to bring up bis young wife in the fear and love of God, and took her to Church regularly; and on being asked if he hold family worship in his house night and morning) ho. replied) “ Always at night, but wo haven’t time of a inorning,” •'which, elicited a severe rebuke. The Bench considered the wife’s statement supported by her witnesses, and the conduct of the defendant heartless, cruel, and inexcusable, and though he offered to take his unfortunate wife back, and promised to be, good to her, the Bench did not think he. should bo trusted, and made an ol'der for 15s. a week for the wife, and ss. a week for the. infant, with £2 2s. costs. I'bis is the third case of conjugal cruelty which has come before the court within a short time.