LEGAL RECIPROCITY

Evening Post, Volume CV, Issue 9, 11 January 1923, Page 7

LEGAL RECIPROCITY

NEW ZEALAND MAINTENANCE ORDER-

(rROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT.)

LONDON, 20th November.

At the Marylebone Police Court a few days ago there was a sequel to an order made by a New Zealand Magistrate against a man, now partner in a Kilburn motor business, directingl him to contribute towards the maintenance of his wife I and family. The proceedings, \*hioh were I to confirm the Dominion Magistrate's order, were taken at the instance of tho Secretary of State for tho Colonies, under the Maintenance Ordersi (Facilities for Enforcement) Act, 1920, and the case was stated to be the first of its kind, at least in London, carrying out the reciprocal agreement that has been made between the various parts of the Empire. Defendant, Albert Richard Bannister, was summoned to show why an order made against him by the Stipendiary Magistrate at Tauranga should not be confirmed or modified. The order, which was made on the ground of desertion, directed him to pay 90s a week for the support of hie wife and two children in Tauranga, and an additional sum of £46 for their maintenance prior to the order. Mr. J. H. Kearns, the defendant's solicitor, said that under the Act defendant could offer no excuse except that allowed by the Magistrate at Tauranga; nevertheless, defendant entirely repudiated the charge of desertion, and claimed that as his income was under £3 a week he could not possibly comply with the order. Giving evidence, Bannister eaid his wife left England of her own accord on 11th August, 1920, and was residing with her father, Thomas James Gardner, at Tauranga. He intended to rejoin her there on the completion of a patent that the firm hac! in hand. Mr. Symons confirmed the order of the Magistrate at Tauranga, but modified it to the extent of directing defendant to pay 30s a week as from 2nd December. He urged defendant, however, to send his family more, and to return to them as soon us possible.