THE MARRIED WOMAN'S PROTECTION—WHICH B THE VICTIM?

Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 127, 14 July 1870, Page 6

THE MARRIED WOMAN'S PROTECTION—WHICH B THE VICTIM?

The following case has been laid before Mr. Travers and Mr* J. C. Richmond, for their joint opinion. Their reply is anxiously expected by a number of married ladies : — On the Ist January, 1871, A marries B. On the Ist October, 1871, B gives, birth to a child. On the Ist November, B (under the Provisions of the Married Woman's Amendment Act) hires herself to C as a wet nurse to his infant for six months, for the sum of £50 for the term. She then intimates to A, >' her husband (under the said act), that she does not intend to nurse his (and her child) any longer, and recommends him to do so himself, or find some one else who can. She then leaves his house and goes to C's. On the Ist March, 1872 (three months after the commencement of her engagement to C), she informs him that, owing to persons over which she has no control, she can no longer provide the nourishment contracted for , on behalf of Cs offspring (she has already received £25 in advance). Your opinion is requested on. the following points : — 1. Can B be sued by C for breach, of contract 1 2. Can B be compelled to refund the £25 paid in advance ? 3. Can B, in case of a verdict against her at suit of C, file her schedule, and take the benefit of the bankrupt law 1 4. Can B insist -upon returning to her husband's house; and will A be obliged to take her in 1 In such case, will she have any right to the parental control of the joint child of herself and A, whom she failed to . nurse as she ought to have done (under the law before, it was, amended^