A MAINTENANCE ORDER.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XXXIII, Issue 35, 10 February 1899, Page 2

A MAINTENANCE ORDER.

At ihe Magiatrate'3 Conrfc to-day, before Mr Robinaon, S.M., Alfred Hogg was charged on the information of his fathor, John Hogg, with having failed to comply with a maintenance order made by the Court last year for the payment of 5s a week towards his (complainant's) support, the amount in arrear being i 2 sa. The defendant aaidthat some weeks ago when he lost his regular employment he told crmplainant that he would be unable to contribute anything further until he ! obtained regular work again. Complainant said '• 1 cannot expect you to." Witness had since provided complainant with food, an occasional shilling or two, and had obtained employment for him. Complainant's earnings, however, had bean spent in drink, By Complainant : Witness had regular work at malting until December 4th, He invested money on the totalisator at the Westport races, but it -was not his money, although he rendered himself liable. He had been sued by the totalisator proprietor for £1 since, but some one else paid thia amount. He had had the re-drying of the malt saved from the flre at the City Brewery, and had ateo had other casnal work By re-drying the malt at Is a bag he earned £13 19s, but his expenses for wages, rent of kilns, etc, were £9 17s 3d. He charged Neale and Haddow (for whom he dried a portion of the malt) with .£2 2g, as a proportion oi the coat ot" the labour. Witness did not indulge freely in hotels. He had had a game of " kitty " occasionally. Mr Wigwell, witness's overseer, had refused to give complainant any further work. Witness had lately had a few days' work at 7s a day. In answer to the Magistrate, the defendant said that he could not pay the arrears until he obtained regular work "ij.iin. Had the complainant not stated that he would expect nothing, he would perhaps have been able to pay the 5s weekly, but he could nsc find £2 us all at once. Mr Bobinson said that the order was not contingent on defendant's employment. He would have to pay the amount within seven days or go to prison for four days. Defendant :,1 cannot pay it. lam now getting 7a a day, and there ia not a red cem in the house. Mr Robineon, addressing the defendant, said that he bad not been satisfied with his demeanour in the matter. He had triad to deceive him (Mr Kobinson) with regard to his earnings, and it was cvi' dent that had he chosen he could have continued to pay the us a week.