A MAINTENANCE CASE

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 91, 7 October 1911, Page 2

A MAINTENANCE CASE

' WAS WORK SCARCE, OR NOT ? In the Magistrate's Court yesterday, before Mr. A. Crooke, S.M., John Charles ' Smith was 1 charged with having failed to ' comply with an order for the payment I of I2s (id per week for the support of his wife, Mary Ann Smith, and 2s Cd per week for each of four children. The arrears to the date of the issue of the summons amounted to £5 12s Ud. Neither complainant nor defendant was represented by counsel. John William Riddick, foreman at the railway goods shed, who had been subpoenaed by the complainant, stated that Smith had worked in the shed for two or three years, but latterly he'had failed to appeared when required, and so had not been employed so regularly. Up to .five or six months ago Smith had attended regularly at the shed. He could have been working there still if he had stuck to it. To His Wprship: Smith's earnings in the shed would have averaged about £2 lfls- per week, taking the bad weeks with the good. Defendant, on oath, said that for the last month he had been ill. He had not earned £2 10s per week in the goods • shed, but only about £2. Since August 10 he had earned less than £1 per week. Work was difficult to get. Ilia Worship questioned defendant closely. Smith admitted that he had not applied to the Labor Bureau for work. Eventually His Worship adjourned the matter for a fortnight, to give defendant a chance to pay off part of the arrears. Smith applied for a variation of the maintenance order, but he had not applied in the statutory way, and so his application could not be-considered.