To the Editor of the New Zealand Herald.

New Zealand Herald, Volume I, Issue 96, 4 March 1864, Page 4

To the Editor of the New Zealand Herald.

Slit,—The letter of "Young Husband" in the Daily Southern Cross of the 2nd instant, written in vindication of Uio conduct of Mr. Beckham, and endeavouring to palliate, and throw on other elioultlora, the burden of his crroneoiiß judgment in the ease of Moule v. Moule, attacks too many interests and contains too many falso statement to allow it to remain unanswered. The facte of the Moulo case are briefly these Little more, than twelve months ago Mrs. Moulc's character was untarnished. She was a youn-f single womau, possessed of a small but beautiful freehold estate in Gloucestershire, aud of much valur.bie personal property. Major Moule (then Mr.'-Moult;) came to purchase the estate, and, instead of buying it, married lite owner, aud inducetl her, wilhiu a few months, -wll it, hisiCt'lf rectiviug tha prec:cds,

fre then hrou»ht lier to N'eu" Zealand in the ship ' Portland,' mid his eouduet on the voyage wus by no eieiins ren arkalile for s])ousid tenderness or enve. Arrived in Aueklaiid he obtained !i eoinniission in oil.- of the Waikato and departed for the I'ront, leaving his youni; wife in a house hy In rst-lf atieiitled liy :i servant bruliidit out by him, under his intUirnee und devoted to his interests. Unbridled tongues will ofren. in unguarded moment*, ntt.-r worls whieh reveal ilie whole undrr plot till then disguised. You very justly, in your ariiele of a previous issue, show how iikelv it iniirlit tie, if sueli delicious are allow,-d (o rule, that eases would arise where a man would take up even with his wife's own sen iint,--IJ'.ra ill 111" saw!, ill tlie kin-lien livcit. l-i .mi.iu-il llieiu-t. lo ilr.M; tin- liiisueis' lieutt; Tlieiii-e t'.n- Mum. i;r;n inns M-rvii-e une\|.ies.seit, Anil. Ir.nn ils only u. In- imci-scil— li.-iisi-il /'mm iho l.iilet 11 ttif tnl.le — Qnii-k villi I'ne lute, mi.t ri iuly wuli On- lit-. Tin: KL-nint eoiiiiilan'.e. uml seiierat spy. —anil then desert hi* wife, anil having rid himself of her at the Toliee Court, take the servant under his ■jroteetion. isueh eases. 1 pay. might arise. How i-nsv would it be to lay traps for the wife by the help of her servant, who. if her mistress was too ill to prevent it. inislit unwarrantably introduce into her mistress's bed elmmhev. when she lay ill in bed. some gentleman who did not know into what plaee lie was about to be shown. AVould any body consider such eouduet oilier than evidence of ft deeply laid Hellenic ?

Major Moide's Midden and hit tor accusal ions fi'iruiiist his wif'o. his violent conduct, unfounded rharces, und ultimate desertion, are well known to the public. It i< Irae, as stated in " Vmiii.!? llnshiinrl's" letter, tlint 1 tie case wns brought under tlio Destitute h'elief Ordinance, and could he I rough! in no uther wuv hv 11 person so \iltor!y friendless uMrs. Moule. ' Tlio case »•»< d. laved for month*, with the anxious endeavour to ellee! n lvcr.nriliiUinn. It was a very simple ease for Mr. Bee'idium to decide. The (irM question was. were tliey man and wi'eHad tliev hern divorced ■" II is true Ihiit the fact ol adultery', ami that only, would have been "reasonuhlf cause" for refusing to maintain her; vet still 1 hold that Mr. HcoUiam had no jurisdiction to decide that point, '"or. in up to the time ol establishine the Divorce Court, the ipiestion roiil.l only be tried in the Spiritual Court. Mrs. Moid.' was put into the box to prove her marriage, the desertion, and her hein.r 101 l without i::ni;:.- i.f sonport, mi! Ihe Court liiieim; fas! contend improperly) allowed her to be cror-s-exanfned as 10 the riiu'stion of adult' rv, no alternaii'.e remained but to call the other wiluo.-s In char up the only material point — her innocence ; and I maintain, in spile- of " Vomit; Husband's" cruel and unmanly asseriion, that the, contradict each other in '•almost all the material points" ; that her innoeer.ee iva« by ilml evidence fully established, and ?ti'l he wan called by the defendant's counsel, the " witnens of truth." ll i" perfect !v cle:ir that the order for maintenance should loi,. been made. The ordinance itself iiives no power of appeal to the wife in case of a wrens; decision, but yives ti power of appeal io the husband within five days, thereby implying that (the marriage and desertion proved or admitted) the order goeti us a matter of course. - Vounc Husband" has attacked two of the public .journals in a most uncalled for manner. The Nr.w Zi:.h,.ini> Hi:i:.\i.r> may well afford to smile at his harmless vituperatives.' The Hi.itAUi deserves the thanks of the whole community for it-' spirited defence of a defenceless woman, mid'ii.s still more .-pirited comments upon a n rule's erroneous decision, ll liies 100 immediately in Ihe blazing lieht of publie opinion to dread an "obseuritv" which bus never shadowed it. I am, Sir. i,.., Homo. March I'.rd. ISO* I. _ _a __