THE LIABILITY OF HUSBANDS

Temuka Leader, 26 February 1880, Page 3

THE LIABILITY OF HUSBANDS

The learned judge of the Swansea County Court, the Cardiff Times says, recently gave an important decision in a case tried before him involving the much vexed question as to the liability of husbands for debts contracted by their wives, Robert Jones sued John Thomas for the value of goods supplied to Thomas’s wife, but the defendant repudiated Ids liability on the ground that his wife- having “ adver ised,” as lie described, he was not responsible for her debts should tradesmen persist in giving her credit without his permission being obtained. His Honour’s decision was entirely in favour of this view ; in giving judgment for the defendant, the learned judge observed that although a man’s wife “ might buy everything necessary for her household, the husband was master of his own purse, and could ■revoke his wife’s authority at any time.” This, it also appears, can be done by a mere verbdl communication to the wife of the husband’s resolution, without any -advertising at all, the husband having « only to take the trouble to revoke his 'wife’s authority to pledge his credit,” by simply ’ c using Ids tongue.” This is somewhat important information for the -afflicted, as some unhappily are, with reckless, expensive or intemperate wives, ond it may be taken as a muchneeded caution to not a few dealers who tempt wives to incur heavy responsibilities without the knowledge of their liusbands-