FIVE DAYS.

Auckland Star, Volume XLVII, Issue 156, 1 July 1916, Page 6

FIVE DAYS.

AND THEN SHE RAN AWAY. A HAPHAZARD MARRIAGE. The evidence given in an action "neard at the Magistrate's Court yesterday afternoon before Mr. C. <J. Kettle, S.M., was of a distinctly unusual nature. The ease was one in which Margaret Creech a young woman (Mr. A. L. Denniston), asked for separation and maintenance from her husband, David Creech, bo years of age (Mr. K. J. Stilling). Tlic plaintiff in lier evidence said that she wart married about two years ago.! ( hut did not remember the date. j The Magistrate: But surely you kno>vj when you were married? | Wit ties.-: No. I don't. I was under the;' influence of drink, and can't remember ' now what happened. I Whore were you married?—ln a rcgi.-- . try ofh'ce. Where was that? - I don't know. lj only know that he (referring to her h'.i.-. | land) got a bad woman to act as witness. In answer to counsel witness said that: she hail lived in Auckland with tine de-j fendant for three weeks before she niar-j ried him. About ten o'clock due morning they went out and were married. They then went back to the house and started drinking, which was kept up for, five days, when witness ran away. She! did not see hvr husband auain until n few weeks atro. Witness had been wor!--1 mc down the East Coast. Mr. Denniston: Did he keep yon?—He ha* never siven mc a shillinat in hU life.; [la* lie ill-treated yon? -Tic- pulled my, hair ami knocked mc on (lie Tro;in 1. and i then wanted mc tn go on the street and keep him. The Magistrate: Dei you mean that seriously?— Yes, sir. he wanted mc *o| fake a shep and stock it with a few; bottles of lemonade and some lollies. H»| said T should do well. Tlie Magistrate: If people can /To to .. I registry office and get married while in- j toxicated. it is hisrh time something was done to prevent it. Tn answer to Mr. Stalling witness said that she had semi her husband drunk, but not very drunk. She would never, have married him had she been sober.. The defendant in his evidence stated, that he was in receipt of the Mnori wnr] I pension. He absolutely denied the truth lof the previous witness's story. He married her to protect her from her bad company and her bad way of livinir. ; They were ' married at the Auckland registry office, and his wife's story wci< a fabrication. He obtained n licence and rintr in the ordinary manner. When hie wif,- had come to him before, the marriasre. and asked for protection, lio had told her that the onh' thJnsi lie could do was marry her. He wanted h<>r back now because- he loved her. His wife had been all right for a fortnight, but then he had comn home and found her drunk in bed. Witness put a Maori woman, who was drinkintr with hii wife, out of the house. Once he had followed Ms wife into the country, and had been brutally assaulted by the men with whom she was living. He was not ad dieted to excessive drink+ng. nu wife had come to the house with a policeman to <iet her box of clothrs. but he had refused to give them up. The This trouble comes of your own foolishness. A man of your asre should have more sense. It is a'ifiird that the time of thr? CoiiTt should be wasted by cases of this nature. The rlaintiff is able to support herself, and has said that she does not went maintenance. The information is dismissed. The defendant was recalled ns he wns leavin? the Court, and the Mairistratc extracted a promise that he would leave his wife* belongings at the police station for her. Mr. Denniston said that this wa_s the real object of fte proceedings.