THE MARINER'S HOME

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 306, 22 June 1912, Page 4

THE MARINER'S HOME

AND HIS CHATTELS. STRONG WORDS BY MR. KETTLE. Auckland, June H>. A somewhat unusual case tame before Mr. Kettle in the Magistrate's Court this niorning. The case was one in which a married man named Charles .ML W. Holmstrom, a mariner, sought to recover from Johnston and Co., a firm of secondhand dealers, a sum of £BS, this being the value of furniture purcliased by that firm without his permission. The Magistrate remarked that thi* was important, as affecting interests ol married men who have to go to sea oi away elsewhere and leave their homes. Plaintiff, in the course of evidence, said that he had been married for fiva years. About March last he found tha* they were getting into debt. He had been in the habit of allowing £ls per month to his wife for housekeeping expenses', and whence asked her to account to him for certain expenditures she refused point-blank .to do so. Ultimately, in order to get over their financial difficulties, they decided to let the house furnished, and both go to work for j six months, at the end of which time they agreed to come together again. The furniture in the house was insured in plaintiffs' name. After making this agreement with his wife, plaintiff went away on a trip. Returning to Auckland at a later date he found that the home had been broken up, and that his wife and furniture had gone. He earned £l7 ) per month, and gave his wife £ls. Defendant, a second-hand furniture dealer, went into the box and stated that a man named Douglas had called to see him, and had asked him to see Mrs. Holmstrom about buying some furniture. Witness went aud valued the furniture, ultimately buying it for £2O. ' In reply to Mr. Kettle, witness said that it had not occurred to him that the husband should have a say in the breaking up of the home. He expected to get 30 per cent, on second-hand furniture when reselling. Cross-examined by Mr. Black (who appeared for plaintiff), witness admitted that Captain Holmstrom had called to warn him not to sell the furniture. Witness had refused to give the goods back and had shown plaintiff Mrs. Holmstrom's receipt for the sale. Defendant's clerk gave evidence that some of the furniture was originally purchased by Mrs. Holmstrom. Violet Holmstrom, wife of plaintiff, was called as a witness Tjy Mr. Dawson ! (solicitor for defendant).' She stated | that she had purchased furniture from defendant on the time-payment system, and hud written to Mr. Johnston that she would have to return the property. ' Under cross-examination, witness admitted having written: "I have no money at present; I must feed my children and pay rent." Later she also wrote: "On *May 4 I shall receive a large sum of money." Mr. Kettle: "Where did you expect to i get it from?—" Mr. Douglas," j Mr. Kettle. Is he a relative? Witness: No; it was money J,lent him, [and for board and lodging. He went tiway without paying. Where is this man, Douglas?—"He [ went south about three weeks ago." In answer to Mr. Dawson, witness said that she thought that the furniture was her own, having bought it in her own name. Mr. Kettle: Why did you give Douglas .your husband's hard-earned money f Witness: I don't know. He asked me, and represented himself as a remittance man. Mr. Kettle: A man who will board with a married woman, pay nothing, and get her husband's hard-earned money can only be characterised by one word, "blackguard." To witness: Don't you Tcgret all this? , Witness: I do. Mr. Kettle then said that this was a <ase that ought to be settled. He asked: "You admit that your husband is a good one?" Witness: Yes, I do. Mr. Kettle. And he has been good to you? Witness: Yes, he has. The case was then adjourned sine die, Mr. Kettle expressing a hope that it might be settled.