SEPARATED

Evening Post, Volume CXI, Issue 42, 19 February 1931, Page 4

SEPARATED

A DOMESTIC QUARREL

A. case was heard before Mr. T. B. M'Neil, S.M., in the Magistrate's Court at Lower Hutt yesterday in which Annie E. Jessop applied against Ernest Albert Jessop, signwriter, for orders of maintenance, separation, and guardianship, alleging persistent cruelty, failure to maintain, and drunkenness. The complainant, for whom Mr. C. K. Barrett appeared, was very agitated while giving evidence, and at once stage appeared to be" on the verge of collapse. The defendant conducted his own case and was several times called to order. Complainant said they had seven children, whose ages ranged from 9 to 21 years. For many years1 her husband had been drinking to excess in spite of the fact, that during part of the time prohibition orders were in force against him. Lately he had never entered the house without threatening to take her life. There were £800 book debts owing from a business of hers, and he lived on that. She had lent him £300 to go into a service station, but he did not stay there long. After he came out of it (about November) he paid her £6 and £2 rent for their house until about six weeks ago. On 18th January he finally left home, and she had received no money since. The defendant gave evidence on his own behalf. He said that his wife had had everything she desired in the last 22 years. He denied that he had ever struck his wife. Two weeks ago he instructed & solicitor to offer his wife £5 a week, and she would not accept it. Now he would pay his wife nothing. He had speculated with1 the funds he had had then, and had "come a thud." "It doesn't matter what you put down, I'm not going to pay anything. I refuse.". Asked by the Magistrate how he had lost his money in the last fortnight Jessop, after- hesitation, said that he had lost the money at Trentham and at the trots. Jessop denied the truth of the evidence as to his fondness for alcohol. The Magistrate said that he had no difficulty in making the orders asked for. He was satisfied that the defendant had been a habitual inebriate for gome time past. His conduct had shown that. In his drunken state he had been persistently cruel, and in the last five weeks he had failed absolutely to maintain his wife. He had more or less deliberately denuded hmiself of funds in the last fortnight. The separation order would be granted on the three grounds of failure to maintain, persistent cruelty, and drunkenness, and the wife would have the custody of tho three children. Maintenance to be paid by the defendant would be £2 15s a week for the wife and 15s a.week for each of the three children. A charging order was made on a house in Myrtle street, Lower Hutt.