REPEATED ORDERS FOR SEPARATION

Press, Volume XC, Issue 27500, 6 November 1954, Page 8

REPEATED ORDERS FOR SEPARATION

MAGISTRATE WARNS ' APPLICANT

“MAKING A MOCKERY” OF COURT

(New Zealand Press Association) TIMARU, November 5. A warning that the Court would not have its orders treated as a mockery and its procedure abused by applicants repeatedly seeking maintenance separation and guardianship orders on the grounds of habitual inebriacy and persistent cruelty was made by Mr E. A. Lee, S.M., in the Timaru Magistrates Court today. “With these applications,” said the Magistrate, "I am as anxious and as willing as anyone to see and assist with reconciliation, but if these people live together, or the wife takes her husband back, without, being satisfied of his bona fide reformation, then she cannot expect the Court to go on making repeated separation orders. Referring to the case before him— Margaret Elizabeth Veronica Murphy v. James Patrick Murphy—the Magistrate said that the woman got orders of separation based on the grounds of habitual drinking and cruelty and almost immediately returned to her husband and further trouble ensued. She came back to the Court and sought a further order. The order was again granted, but soon after she resumed cohabitation with her husband at her own risk. “Now she is back «««ktag orders for the third time," said the Magistrate. His view was that it was just making a mockery of the Court. “In this case an order will be male to protect the wife and family, but I issue it with the utmost reluctance, he said. The Magistrate warned the comnlainant that he would not countenance further litigation.