FITZGERALD v. FITZGERALD.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2157, 31 January 1891, Page 2

FITZGERALD v. FITZGERALD.

At the R.M. Court, Timaru, yesterday, 0. A. Wray, Esq., R.M., gave judgment in the case of Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald, a husband's suit for maintenance. Mr White for the applicant, and Mr Raymond for defendant. His Worship said he had given a good deal of consideration to the case, and he found it a difficult one to deal vvith. It appeared that the man bad been discharged from the hospital as an incurable. He was asked to make an order sufficient to enable the man to go to the Dunedin Hospital : one guinea per week. If it were assumed for the sake of argument that there had been cruelty or desertion sufficient to give him jurisdiction to make an order of tliafc kind, the question arose as to the ability of the wife to pay. It appeared that she had property, but she was maintaining a family of seven children, and the probable outcome of such an order would ba that their home would ba sacrificed ; she could not make such a> payment and still keep on her farm. Then there were circumstances in the conduct of the man himself ; there had been a protection order issued against him, and other indications that there were faults on his side as well as hers. He then considered the offer made by Mrs Fitzgerald to maintain her husband on the farm. The evidence showed that there was no likelihood of their living happily together. He had been in hopes that some arrangement nii;_;ht be made by which the man could have been received for a moderate sum by either the Hospital or the Charitable Aid Board, but he had seen the chairman of the board, and understood there were no means of making any arrangement for looking after him outside the hospital. Then '.here was no chance of the couple living happily together —but it was not a question of happiness but of bare .subsistence ; the man must life upon his wife or upon the rates —he was inclined to think that the proposal made by his wife should be tried, —that he should go and live on the farm. Fitzgerald gave as one reason for not accepting this offer that he could not go to the furra while the man Moore w 8 retained, but an undertaking had been given that if this objaclion was persisted in Moore would ba discharged. He did not see how the complainant could be squeamish under the circumstances ; it was a question of bare subsistence, not of hippinesp. He was inclined to think the wife's offdr should ba taken, with the understanding that if by any fault, cruelty, or oppression on her putt her husband was obliged to leave the premises, the consideration he had mentioned could be waived, and so long as ehe had any means at all she must pay so much a week io maintain her husband elsewhere. Jfon the other band the husband, who seemed to be a peculi-ar man, made himself disagreeable so that the wife could not tolerate bioo, then the consequences would fill upou him. This might keep both pai ties on proper behaviour. XJoder the.

circumstances he did not think he woul<) be justified in Ukiog »way 'he home of the woni'in and her children in order to pension the hubband. Mr White eaid if he had anticipated that this question would have ariseD he would have brought evidence to show that the wife is really well off. and suggested that an order be made for £1 per week to let Fitzgerald try the Dunedio Hospital. His Worship declining to do this, Mr While suggested that the case be allowed to at nod over for a while to see how the wife's arrangement would woik. His Worship refused, and dißmiesed the ioform'Uioo.