RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.—GISBORNE.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume XI, Issue 1329, 14 July 1883, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.—GISBORNE.

[Before J. Booth, Esq., R-.M.*l Thursday, July 12. Sydney Josiah Smith Rowley Bromley was brought up, charged with the complaint 3, “ That he intended to leave his wife without adequate means of support.” This was one of three complaints that had been laid, the other two were- ], that he had been guilty of leaving his wife without adequate maintenance ; 2, that he did unlawfully desert his wife. These complaints were laid on the information of Sydney Almanac de Mountfcrd Bromley, son of the defendant. Mr Kenny appeared for the complainant; and Mr Brassey, with Mr Robinson, for the defendant. Mr Brassey asked if Mr Kenny expected to get orders on each of these complaints he had made. Mr Kenny replied that three different complaints had been made, but he did not expect three orders for the same. All their object now was to obtain a maintenance for his (defendant) wife, and he would proceed with the complaint under the 18th clause first. Mr Bra sey said the information under the ISth clause of intending to leave, &c., would support their side, and urged that the chief question was that as they, complainant and defendant, had been separated fifteen years, the information should have been laid six months before according to the Act, and was therefore beyond His Worship’s jurisdiction. His Worship replied that the complainant’s first steps should have been in the Divorce Court, and concurred with Mr Brassey that the complaint was beyond his jurisdiction. . Mr Kenny, after making several quotations and arguments, said he would open the case by briefly narrating the principal facts, of the case. He now produced the marriage certificate of the defendant and his first wife. Mr Brasse}’ rose and objected to its being read until it was put in as evidence. Mr Kenny said he insisted on reading it; that the bar was privileged to read any documents they intended to put in as evidence. He had frequently seen it done.

His Worship, however, overruled this, stating that Mr Kenny could make use of it to refresh his memory, but that it should not be read till put in as evidence. Mr Kenny continued his narrative, and said he would now put in certain letters from the defendant to the complainant, which would materially support their cause. Mr Brassey objected to the letters being put in on the ground that they had nothing to do with the case as it now stood. The intention to leave his wife, &0., must be shewn at the present time, not by what had been taking place years ago. He submitted that what had been done a time, ago, is not what he is doing now, or what lie is even going to do. Mr Kenny urged that the letters should go in, as he would produce them for a twofold purpose—l, to show that the parties loft on good terms; 2, that the defendant

when he got over hare pretended that he was doing all sorts of things, bound up in negotiations for land, &c,, and that at this time he. had & mistress. These letters were written to keep complainant away, They are facts, and show the intention. If they are shut out, then valuable information is shut out. ft is all nonsense to say that the case is what the defendant’s intention is now, for how are we to gather his intentions, but from his past actions, which these letters will prove. His Worship said as far as this case was concerned, it was only what had taken place during the last three weeks of her arrival in New Zealand. The letters during the last fifteen years were of no use, and he could not seo how they would benefit by their being put in. On this Mr Kenny called the first witness ;— Jane AE. Bromley deposed—-My name is Jane Anne Eliza Bromley, lam the person named in the certificate of marriage, which Mr Kenny produ icd. Mr Brassey objected to the certificate, on the ground that it was not signed by the Registrar-general or his deputy, and after great argument between the coumels, both quoting many authorities to support their side, His Worship decided to let the certificate be put in. Examination resumed—l received the certificate on the day of my marriage. I saw the person who signed it. My two brothers are alive, and were present at the wedding. I cannot- say if the other witness is alive. I have fire cliilhgi now living, and they are registered as his (prisoner’s) children, When I married defendant T had some property, some houses in Hamilton, the place where I lived. I also had land ; 1 have no property now. In 1869 I was at Gleninms, keeping’a private school. My lius’ and was in a situation elsewhere at the time, and he sent for me, and I went there to him He went to Tasmania in 1869, to take a situation obtained for him by his nephew at llbrucca. He promised to send me money. We parted on good terms. I was to join him in six months’ time. He cor: esponde I with me and I with him, While he was away he made two payments after gutting into his situation. In his next letter he said he would not send me any more money till he got another situation He was struck off pay on account of the failure of the mines. I heard from him after this at Hobartownj He was looking out fur employment there. I think the first letter I received from him from New Zealand was dated 15th September, 1876. After that I got a letter and series of letters from Poverty Buy. Sometimes he would cease corresponding for six months at a time. 1 have received nothing but the two instalments of £lO each, lie has always written as to his ability to support his family. I had a school and kept my family by it. I had not the means of coming to him, and if 1 had he desired mo not to come or to send my son to him. He said if I came to him I would ruin his prospects, and that he would leave the Colony. His prospects were the dealing in Maori land, j wrote to the Postmaster-General asking who had received the registered letter I sent to him, and he replied that it was the prisoner. After this I determined to send my son to find his father and bring him homo, as he had written that he was in great distress* Not receiving any letter from my son I came here as 1 was very uneasy in my mind. I arrived here on 15th June. I went to the prisoner’s house on the 16th. When 1 arrived there I saw a female; I asked her for Mr Biomley. I was asked in. She asked me did I wish to sec him particularly, I asked her if there was a Mrs Bromley there, and she answered that she was Mrs Bromley. I told her that she was not his lawful wife. I left with my son, and met prisoner in the street. 1 asked him what he had to say for himself. He seemed surprised to see me, and replied that he scarcely knew what to say for himself. He said I hud done the worst thing I could by coming here, as I had ruined his prospects. I then asked him why he allowed this woman to call herself his wife? He replied “I admit I have done wrong ; tho ceremony had been gone through, and (No 2) thought it was correct. That when the ceremony was gone through she was not expected to live an hour after, and that it had been done to benefit me and my family.” After a long conversation as to what he would do, I asked him to come to terms. I asked him to .give me £5OO, and 1 would trouble him no more. He replied that he would try what he could do to raise the money, and asked for time to do it. He proposed for my son to call on him the next ; day. My son, brought a message for me to ! go and see prisoner, and for him to show me j his inability to raise the money, I did not ■ go to the house, but wc made arrangements i to meet on the beach on tho 18th June. ■ There I asked him what he would do. He j asked for another week, and he would try I and scrape the money together. I consented ; to wait the week, and my son was to call on him on the following Sunday morning. On i that morning I learned from my son that the I prisoner had gone to Auckland, and I then i went to the police station and had him • arrested. It will be a month to-morrow since I arrived here. All this time I have been supporting myself. During the last year or two my son and daughters have helped to keep me—my health was too bad to keep up the school. Tire money I came here with came from my son-in-law. When the prisoner went away 1 had no knowledge of his ultimate destination. I do believe

he intends to leave me without support. To Mr Brassey—l was married in 1847. I was married in a private residenc belong- ■ ing to an hotel, by a Wesleyan minister, i I am not aware that a certificate was ob- • tained from a registrar. Since our mar- j riage we have not always lived on good 1 terms. I have not seen my husband for : thirteen years until coming to Gisborne. During that time I have written to my husb; nd. I never heard that defendant was living with another woman till I came here. I had no knowledge or ever suspected he was living with another woman. As a wife I have never been guilty of unfaithfulness; . I do not know a person of the name of ' Wei’s, a police clerk at Hamilton. I havo : no recollection ef such a person. At one j time my father kept a public-house ; a person named Wells was never there to my re- , collection. I know two persons named I Barracks and Lascelle. I never confessed i to my husband at Hamilton that I hud intercourse with a man named Wells. I have j no recollection of such a person. At one I

time my father kept a public house, a person named Wells was never there to my recollection. I know two persons named Banacks and Lascelles. I never confessed to my husband at Hamilton that T hud intercourse with a man named Wells. I have never been unfaithful to my husband I see t’»e letter produced is mine. What I say in it that I heard be was living with someone else, is a mistake. My children suggested me to put the question to him and T did so, but I had never heard he was living with another t worn in. In 1577 1 did n->t know he was living with someone else. This other letter profliic ■<!, da’ed 20th January, 1877, 1 believe is iny writing. I may have just at tho time said I would not trouble him. I caine here under the name of .Mrs Lewis, because the prisoner told my son if I came here he would leave the colony, so I altered my name ti a he should not know I had arrived. I know a

place called Tarrangulia, I knew n Justice of the Peace named llamond. J was charged before him with stealing some clothes, which was dismissed. Mr Hamond did not say that the case was strongly suspicious against myself; he strongly repremanded the woman who brought the charge. My son gave up the situation he was in to come after his father. During the time of Mr Bromley’s absence I have never sent him any money. I have never told any one hero that I have sent defendant money. I have been trying to obtain evidence to prosecute defendant for bigamy. I may havo said that I would punish him if I could. To the best of my knowledge those arc my brother’s signature to the certificate of marriage. It ia my intention te return to my family. My son-in-law will keep mo. I cannot do sufficient work to support myself. (Owing to pressure on our apace, the remainder of our report is unavoidably held over.)