S.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XV, Issue 4735, 1 June 1894, Page 3

S.M. COURT.

MASTERTON-FRIDAY,

(Before Mr T Hutchison S.M.) Catherine George v. S. George, This was a case in which the plaintiff sued her husband for maintainence. Mr Jackson who appeared for the plaintiff, stated that this was a case that absolutely necessiated separation, since the parlies simply could not live together. The plaintiff stated that some eight years ago her husband became very cruel to her. This continued for some years, but finally she could not stand it, and leaving her husband, went into service, at the advice of her relations, in Australia. On her return she found her husband in Pahiatua. He met her with bad lauguage. but took her to Eketahuna Here he re-commenced his ill treatment and after six months she was forced to leave him. She returned to Melbourne, and stayed there in service for five years, where she was taken ill. Defendant's sister, Mrs Owen, of Tenui, wrote asking her to come back, Returning to New Zealand she went back to her husband, and accompanied him to Alfredton For a short time he treated her better, but then once more began to treat her cruelly, Once he ran alter her with a supple-jack, but she locked herself in her bedroom and kept out of the way. She was afraid to live with the defendant.

By Mr Pownall : She had lived with her husband since 1862, and until the ill-treatment complained of took place (some seven years ago), they had been happy. Her husband had paid her £10 to go away to Melbourne. She had been in service for some years and had supported herself, but owing to illhealth she had had to give up service. She was now fifty years of age, and could not support herself any longer. Mr Pownall for the defence stated that defendant George was willing to offer his wife a home again. The truth was that the plaintiff, being of a restless disposition had never been happy in one place long. The defendant deposed that he kept an accomodation house in Alfredton. For many years he and his wife had lived happily in Eketahuna. His wif finally became strange in her mannere and asked him for money for a trip to, Melbourne, He gave it to her. She returned in three months, aud he took her up to Woodville, and on her again becoming restless he took her to Eketahuna. After remaining about seven months she again asked to go away, and had her maiden name painted on her boxes, He was very poor at the time. She went away, leaving six children with him. She stayed away for five years. Did not correspond with his wife. His sister, Mrs Owen, prevailed upon the plaintiff to return from Australia, and he saw her at his sister's place, Tenui. The last time she left it was altogether unknown to him. He had never struck his wife, and had not incited the children to annoy his wife She was always welcome to come back, again.

By Mr Jackson : He and his wife have lived very happily, and he ascribed the change to her peculiarity of manner. He would keep his wife so long as she be haved herself.

By His Worship : He was very kind to her especially after she became strange in her head. He had never troubled to write to her. On the last time the plaintiff left, he had looked for her and taken trouble about the matter. It was possible for him to live with his wife. He was very affectionate.

His Worship : "I think you'll have to strain your affection so far as to give her maintenance,"

St. Clair Munro George, son of the defendant, stated he could remember when his family lived at Stony Creek, Could not remember any ill-usage by the defendant to the plaintiff. He believed that if the plaintiff returned to the defendant, the parties would be happy, By Mr Jackson : He had never heard the defendant admonish the plaintiff, His father had not told him, if he took his mother's part he (defendant) would do nothing for him. He had noticed that his mother was strange ever since they were at Stony Creok. His Worship then enquired if there was any chance of a settlement, so far as the plaintiff was concerned. Mr Jackson : So far as my instructions go, there is not.

Mr Pownall stated that his client was willing to settle, and desired nothing more than that his wife should return to his house.

His Worship decided lo adjourn the case until to-morrow morning, in the hope of a settlement being arrived at between the parties. T. Robinson v J.Robinson. On the application of Mr Pownall, for the defendant, this case was adjourned for a fortnight. S.J. Elley v J. Elley. Mr Pownall for defendant slated that the proceedings emanated, not from the plaintiff, but indirectly through her, from the Benevolent Society. There was no appearance-, of the plaintiff, and the Court ;adjowned for a quarter of an hour to euahlo" her to appear. On the Court resuming' Mr W. G. Beard stated that he had just received instructions to tako tho case for the plaintiff, and in view of this fact, would 1 apply for an adjournment for a fortnight. .■■■•■■•■ MrPownall objected to the application! His client was'a working iiiau and could not bear 1 the expense of constantly attending the Court. Besides, tho case against the defendant was utterly untenable, seeing that he had in Court a decree absolute of the Divorco Court which he had obtaincd'somci four ycarsago, " . _ " Worship, decided' to. adjourn, the casolouforluigW,