R.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 5, Issue 1500, 4 October 1883, Page 2

R.M. COURT.

CARTERTON-WEDNESDAY.

[Before R S. Wardell, R.M. |

S. DewvO. Olark.—Affiliation. Mr Handilands for complainant, Mr Gray for defendant. This case, after occupying the Court for some hours, was withdrawn on the application of Mr Sandilands. ! G. W. 'Dollar v C. R. Miller.— Damages done by a dog, the property of defendant, by worrying sheep £9 2s. Mr Sandilauds for plaintiff, Mr Gray for defendant.; Judgment for defendant.

J. €jally> v M. Ryan.-Debfc 10s 1& Judgment for plaintiff with costs 345.

' There' were a number of cases settled out of Court or withdrawn!

MASTERTQN-TBUBSDAXv

(Before H. S. Wardell, R.M.)'

Schroder v. John Parker.—Larceny.

Mr Beard for defendant, asked for an adjournment till the following day as he had only just been instructed. The Court consented to an adjournment till this afternoon. . Mr Beard asked for hail to be allowed.

The Court consented to the application, fixing the bail at two sureties of £IOO each, Mr Beard submitted the names of the' Rev. L, M. Isitfc and Mr R. Brown as sureties, He stated that bail would have been obtained yesterday only no bail forms were available.

The' Court said that every facility should be given to the accused to obtain bail.

The Sergeant said that he had endeavored to obtain bail, but the person who was to become surety was of opinion that it would be better to let matters stand as they were.

Mr Beard asked the Court' to be satisfied with one surety of a hundred pounds, and the Court agreed to this course.

G, W. Schroder v Thomas Braggins, -Debt £8 18s 6d. Judgment for amount and costs.

Same v Arthur Harford.—Debt £3 18s 3d. Judgment for amount and costs.

T. W. Shute v John Dew.—Debt £l. Judgment for amount and costs. Raine v Raine,--Adjourned case. Mr Beard appeared for the defendant.'

The Court said it should have to remand the case to Christchurch. Mv Beard said the E.M. at Christchurch would not have jurisdiction, He was willing to admit that the monies ordered to he paid had not been paid.

The Court said this admission would obyiate the necessity for a remaad to Christchurch. It did not, however, agree that the Magistrate at Christchurch had no jurisdiction.

Mr Beard submitted that the order was bad, as it was made for the support of the wife and two children, the statute providing that it should be lawful to make allowance for the wife and any one child only. He submitted that the order being invalid all liability under it ceased. He was also prepared to show that the children were over fourteen years of age, and that defendant had offered to take back his wife.

The Court could hardly go with .Mr Beard that the order was. bad because it was made for two children instead of one, Tt read the Act to mean that a maximum limit of. twenty shillings per week was fixed for the wife and any one child. Mr Beard then ■ argued-that the order terminated when the children reached the age of fourteen years, • "The Court said the order might be varied on it being; shown that the children had obtained the age of fourteen years, but this would not effect .past liabilities. Mr Beard did not ask for the order to bo varied, It was for the Court to' say when the liability under the order ceased. '•

~ Mr Bunny said if it would bo any assistance to the Court he would be willing to argue the question on behall of Mrs Baine. i

Mr Beard thought his friend should hardly appear on behalf of Mrs Raine without authority from her. • The Court paid it would bo glad to have Mrs Raine represented, especially as it was dealing with the case in her absence, Mt Bunny, volunteering to act, it was only too glad to awept hLsoffer. ' , •

Mr Beard said .his'friend came in as amicus ,cv,rke. He was quite prepared to accept the position. : The Court said Mr Bunny had formerly appeared for Mrs Baine, and it was glad to have his assistance on the present occasion. Mr Bunny submitted that the point as to the children having reached the age of fourteen years must fail. The order made in 1878 was admitted as valid, and till it was admitted as valid and till it was varied or rescinded'it must be .sustained if not inconsistent with law. The sum of sixteen shillings was an amount that might legally be .continued to the wife after the children h«'d reached the age of fourteen years. •Such a sum' might be paid to the ,wj^e r even if no children were in existen'ce,.. The only alternative was to admit that,the,order was;bad,from tho commencement. This would place Mrs Baine in a serious position. Mr Beard stated that the original information made the twp as

wellasthe wife, parties to the case. ; The amount of sixteen: shillings b clearly intended for the children aswell as for the wife. The fact of pay». ment being made under the order did not validate it. If the order was bad , ah initio Mr Raine could not be compromised, as a husband could -not sue"

his wife..,: ...";.. -,•'.•;■', ; ~-'• Thomas Raine, sworn,' deposed that Agnes Eaine, of Christchurch, was his wife. , She had two children' ;nftm4d Margaret and Adelaide;'/'Margaret seventeen in November next, and Adelaide was fourteen months younger. Both were" born 'in Christchurch. Witness wrote to his wife repeatedly offering to take her back during the last eight or nine months.

The- Court said it would be glad if the other side admitted the fact that the children were over fourteen years; but even if they were it held that the order was good. The fact that the sum was within the amount to which the -wife herself was entitled in its opinion made the. order valid, It would be prepared to consider an application to vary the order on the facts presented. The decision of the Court would be a small fine if the arrears under the order amounting to £2O were paid in.. .

Mr Beard suggested that the fine, should bo £5 Is, so that appeal against it. | i.';-- ) The Court conourred, but saifj. that / if the arrears were not paid intolyOpt it would sentence the defendant prisonment. c-

[Left Sitting.]