APPLICATION FOR SEPARATION ORDER.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XLII, Issue XLII, 14 June 1907, Page 2

APPLICATION FOR SEPARATION ORDER.

. The case McDonough v. McDonough (a\ wife's application for separation and maintenace orders) was continued . Mr Maginnity, who appeared- for the defendant, submitted that no evidence had been adduced in support of the charge of cruelty against the husband. He asked the Court to consider whether there had not been a combinationagainst the defendant. Either there was very faulty recollection on the part of the members of the family, or a combined effort to get rid of the father. In view of the decided cases Mr Maginnity urged that there was no charge of persistent cruelty for the defendant to answer. Mr Harley combatted Mr Maginmty's contention, and said that bodily hurt or injury to health, or a reasonable apprehension of one or either of these were, sufficient grounds, and Dr. Andrew's evidence, he claimed, -was a verification of what had to be proved. The evidence showed that the children had had to go to neighbours' houses, and to threaten to call in the police. Other statements given in evidence were referred to, and Mr Harley said quite suf- v ficient had been broughb forward in N support of a separation order. . ■ The Magistrate held that supposing the 'statements made were tTiip there was a case to answer. The evidence stated that there had. been outbursts of violent temper on the.part of the husband, threats, and on one occasion shocking conduct. Jis to the suggestion of .a conspiracy that was a fair comment, bufc who but the wife and children could give evidence? They could not be put out of court, but their evide.nc,6 must be carefully sifted. Thf Magistrate said the case must go on." Evidence was then called for the .defence, and was still being taken when we went to press. . . .