Incensed Fathers Fury in Court

Sun (Auckland), Volume 1, Issue 38, 7 May 1927, Page 16

Incensed Fathers Fury in Court

A HUMAN SIDELIGHT PROSPEROUS SON ASSAILED (From Our Resident Reporter.) WELLINGTON, To-day. An exciting little human sidelight occurred in the court late this afternoon, before Mr. J. H. Salmon, S.M., during the hearing of the case in which John Snell, aged 72, sued his son, Joseph Snell, who is in charge of the Mortgage Department in Public Trust, for sufficient money to supplement his pension and maintain him. The wife of complainant, and mother of defendant, aged 74, who is just recovering from the effects of a serious operation, was forced to enter the box and give evidence for her son. This spectacle was too much for the aged complainant, who became so incensed that he rushed from his chair toward his son, crying, “you damn cur to bring my poor wife into court.” For about a minute there was uproar in the court, and it was not till the old man had made a second unsuccessful attempt to reach his son that counsel and the court officials succeeded in pacifying him sufficiently to induce him to remain in his seat for the conclusion of the hearing. The action was pathetic throughout. The mother in the box declared that her attitude toward her husband was the same as before he left her.

Defendant gave evidence, stating that his father was kindly treated by the family and he (defendant) refused to give the requested £1 a week maintenance as he thought his father’s living alone was a reflection on tlje family. Defendant said that he was willing that his father should go to a home (public or private), and he would contribute to his support. He denied that his father had expended any money on him, directly or indirectly, since he (defendant) was 13 years old.

Under cross-examination defendant admitted that he had never given his father a shilling in his life. Defendant was now 44.

Mrs. Snell, sen., said that but for the differences usual in matrimony she had had happy times with her husband and that if he came back home he would be treated kindly. It was when plaintiff’s counsel rose to cross-examine that the incident occurred.

Plaintiff pleaded with counsel not to ask Mrs. Snell any more questions, saying that he would rather lose the case than that she should have to undergo the further ordeal of giving evidence against him. Suddenly he rose to his feet and rushed toward his son with clenched fist and tears streaming down his face, asking the son how dare he bring his (plaintiff’s) wife to court, the woman he loved best in the world. Both counsel laid restraining hands cfti the old man, and the wife had to be assisted from the court almost in a state of collapse. The magistrate intervened and said that the case had gone far enough, too far in fact, and he asked counsel to see him in his room and talk the matter over. Decision will be given to-day.