A DRAPER'S ACCOUNT.

Auckland Star, Volume LIII, Issue 189, 11 August 1922, Page 2

A DRAPER'S ACCOUNT.

PLEDGING HUSBAND'S CREDIT. CASE AT SUPREME COURT. ' An interesting case regarding the ■ right of a wife to pledge her husband's credit, came, before Mr. Juetke Herd- ' man and jury of four at the Supremo Court to-day, when Smith and Oaughey, Ltd. (Mr. E. W. Inder, inetrucfted by : Thome and Thome) sued Esmond Napier, of Devonport, for £139 17/6 for - goods purchased between September 7, 1921, and March 3, 1922, such goods, enumerated in a lengthy detailed list, I being from ev«ry department of a 1 drapery etore. The highest priced item was a costume at £16 16/. PlaintifTe claimed to have cold and delivered the • goods to defendant's wife as agent for her husband, the wife having authority from him to pledge his credit for the j goods, which were necessaries suitable for the defendant's and his wife's style of living. : Samuel L. Barry, chief clerk at Smith and Caughey's, said Mrs. Napier j arranged the opening of the account, j . saying her husband would be respon- ! srb'le. Mr. Xapier'e connection with a I legal firm and his position warranted j this, the card was first made out in , Mrs. Napier's name, but the letter "s" I was later deleted. They also put down | • who Mrs. Napier was 'before her marrt- I \ age ac information. There were no. ex- j I travagftnt purchases in the account. | Cross-examined, witness eaid he did i not- inquire from Mrs. Napier, what' lier husband's salary wis or whether she was living with him; whether there was any allowance or whether she had ; authority to pledge his credit. ; Most of the business was done through '. lady menibers of families. He did not , think all the goods were sent to Princes 1 Street. He did not know Mrs. Napier j , I was not living with her husband. Her maiden name was well known to the firm. When it was seen that the account was not to be paid, then the husband • was approfched. Mr. Napier repudiated i the account as soon as he received it. ' Roeie Napier, wife of Esmond Napier, said they married seven years ago. During last year she was living in the same house as her husband, and in Sep-1 tember she waa receiving an allowance ( of £2 per week from her husband, and , she ordered all household goods, for I which her husband paid. He did not tell j her she was to run up en account for j dress. They used to do plenty of enter j taining, and her husband went to the, races and speculated "freely. The j goods were cent to her father's nouse. | where she sometimes stayed. Her hueband bought a motor car, and built a house out of his money, of which he : seemed to have plenty. She was permitted to run what accounts she liked, • and prior to that she had run up simi-1 lar accounts at John Court's and : Milne's. She received her allowance by cheque. To Mr. Luxford: She opened the account at Smith and Caughey's just for : a change. She had not lived with her ! husband since June, last year, but lived in the name house until two months ago. To Hie Honor: She used to get peimission to open an account, but she did not in this case. Proceeding. ..