A SAD TALE.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XV, Issue 4626, 19 January 1894, Page 3

A SAD TALE.

Drink Again I

An application v?aa made in the, Masterton R.M. Court this momin/ before Mr T. Hutchison, R.M., foya prohibition order against W. Lao{soy. Mr Bunny appeared on buhalf of Langley, to oppose the granting of the order. ■ ' \ Fannj Langley, wife of Walter langley, gave evidjjtfce tbat her husband was or eight weeks and He had only ' been thmvs sober since Christmas. Whensouerhe had worklo do, Had obtained food era credit, and her children were nearly naked, Defendant's - conduot was very bad when he waß in liquor. She had no idea where he got the money for drink. She bad seen bills—one for £4 and one for £2 Bent to her husband for the supply of I drink. .

In reply to Mr Bunny witness said she had not been on good terms with her husband, but had never refused to give him food. She had liecn married 23 years, and during that time her husband had kept the home "after a fashion," .She had done her beat to prevent her husband drinking, What food there was in the house, her husband always had access to. She had not driven her hußband to drink as stated, but be always had a clean comfortable borne to oome to when he liked. She got no money from her husband and had to do the best she could, daughter of last witness, gave evidence that her father drank very much and very often. When he came home drunk hi awore at her mother and made matters unpleasant. There were nine children in their family, the eldest being eighteen, .By Mr Bunny. Was sure her father had been drank ever since Christmas, and he had done no work, Her mother seldom answered her father back, and never refused him a meal to her knowledge. Sometimes when he was drunkshe replied to him and thea there was a row.

Samuel Kingdon said he bad known the parties fo: many years, He was o£ an opinion that if an order were granted against Langley, it would be a boon to his family and the community at large. For the laßt three monthsh^Jid not think Langley had been sooefjfor a day. Otherwise be had nothing whatever against him'.. By Mr Bunny: Langley wab drunk on every ocoasion witness had met him, daring the last three months, He could not say how many times he had seen defendant during the period named, but on some days it was three or four times a day. 0. H. Payne the next witness, said he was sorry to Bay that Langley was given to excessive drinking. By Mr Bunny: As far as lie nasi aware quarrels between Langley and his wife arose through Langley coming boms intoxicated, Oonstable May gave evidence that he wbb a near neighbour of Langley's and had, times out of number, spoken to Langley about keeping away from the drink. Langley was a man who could get too intoxicated to work, and yet keep so that the police could not lockvbim up; Mr Bnnny said in the face of the testimony giren he did not further oppose the order. He had resisted the order under the belief that if it were granted there would be trouble between husband and wife.

His Worship said defendant had added tMhe offence by endeavoring to place Hblame of bis drinking on his wife; He would cheerfuly make the order to extend over the whole district,

As Langley was leaving the Court His Worship called him baok and said that if in consequence of the granting of the order Langley made his wife or children suffer any annoyance or ill-usage, his punishment would be very severe.