A MAINTENANCE CLAIM.

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 3, Issue 204, 16 June 1914, Page 2

A MAINTENANCE CLAIM.

For Wife and Children. In the Auckland Magistrate's Court on Friday, before Mr C. C. Kettle, S.M., Isabella Louisa Tilly proceeded ([against her husband, William Henry Chailes Tilly, farmer, of Patumarne, for the maintenance of herself and three children. Applicant, who wai represented by Mr W. P. Endcan, also asked for a separation ord.r. It was explained by Mrs 'lilly that the three children, in respect U which she clsimed maintenance, were her children, ar.d were the issue of a former marriage. She knew defendant for 111 months before she married him, and the marriage tcok place in September, 19J0. At that time, she was a widow with six chidreii. Defendant had boarded with htr for I<> months before the marriage, of which thero was one child. She and defendant went on to a farm i ear Pukekohe, and she tick with her ens of her children. Two othera weie livinz with relations. Later, two other children came to the farm, and this annoyed defendant, who would not recognise them. Atter the lapse of three or four months he wanted to send them away. The arrival of the two children was r.ot the whole cause of the trouble between defendant and herself, but it did not improve matters. During the two years she was on the farm she never bought any clothes for herself and children, except for the one born on the farm. Defendant threatened her several timea. He smashed all the crockery one day, and another time he commenced to break up the furniture. She could not say exactly what was the cnuse of the trouble. Defendant knew she was a widow before she married him. Since leaving defendant she had conducted a laundry, and afterwards a boarding house.

Defendant said he could rot atl'ord to pay the maintenance sought by his wife. He hal £IOO in the ba::k, hut th 3 farm was not paying well, ard he intended to fcpjnd this money in effecting improvements. He had married applicant because slid had threatened trouble if he did not d) ro. At the present time, he was paying 7s <H per week towards the nnintenar.ee of the child bom on the farm. He waa willing to take Mra Tilly hack to the farm. The lirst trouble had arisen through the rows not being milked. He admitted smashing the crockery in a tit of psssion. Mr Kettle said that defendant married applicant because he was weak, and the marriage was not a Buccals.

"What Mr Justice Cooper has been saying about these marriages is perfectly true,'' continued the magistral. "It was the honourable thing

to e!o, but at the same time it is not always desirable to do absolutely the honourable thing because it mav lead to worse trouble in the future. The question is whether a man should land himself ami a woman in worse trouble by marrying. Unless the parties are bound together by some bond of sympathy the thing is foolish."

The case was adjourned for one month, during which time defendant waj ordered M pay 10s per week out of the £IOO in the bank towards the maintenance of his wife; ha has also to continue the payment of 7s tid per week in respect to his own child's support.