A COLONEL'S WIFE CHARGED WITH CRUELTY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXIII, Issue 10223, 29 August 1896, Page 2 (Supplement)

A COLONEL'S WIFE CHARGED WITH CRUELTY.

j At Ramsgate Police Court, Mrs. Ruby Spalding, wife of a lieutonant-colonol in the army, was remanded in custody on a charge of cruelly ill-treating her son, aged eleven. The defendant behaved in an extraordinary manner throughout the hearing of the oaso. The evidence of six domestic servants formerly in the service of the defendant wont to show that the accused frequently imprisoned the lad in a dark collar, sometimes kept him without food, had struck him with a dogwhip, threatened him with a poker, had thrown a flower-vase at his head, and had said she would bo hanged for him. It was further alleged that sho was frequently under the influence of drink, and that her language was most violent and obscene, During counsel's opening remarks Mrs. Spalding told him that ho was a lawyer, and urged him to 'pile on the agony' and produce the victim. She ropeatodly interrupted and abused the witnesses, and called upon the magistrates to order the lawyers to cease lying. After two hours' forbearance, the defendant was ordered to stand up in tho dock, having up to that moment been accommodated with a chair. She refused, resisted the efforts of tho police, and was overpowered only after a severe struggle. Then she addressed tho presiding magis trato as 'an old devil,' and followed this with other violent language. When finally forced into the dock, sho stood with her back to the magistrates in order to show her contempt for them. As this extraordinary conduct was still persisted in, defendant was ordered to the coll?, and a violent struggle ensued, in the course of which Mrs. Spalding struck the chief constable in the face. Ultimately, eho was dragged screaming from the court. The defendant was brought up again next day. Her solicitor having apologised to the Bench for her loss of self-control on the previous day, the chairman replied that the Bench deeply sympathised with the colonel ; that was all he could say. The defendant, was on this occasion very quiet. Evidence for the defence was given by Colonel Spalding, who generally donied the allegations of cruelty, and declared his wife was exceedingly fond of the boy. He admitted the occurrence of frequent storms in tho house, but donied that defendant's violent conduct was attributable to drink. Dr. Hicks gave evidence that defendant suffered from blood poisoning and hysteria, and that she was a weak woman. Cross examinod : He did not see the weak woman handling three policemen in the dock yesterday. She was not an habitual drunkard, but he believed she took some quantity sometimes. He had never seen her inebriated. Tho little boy Walter also gave evidence. Ho denied that he had been ill treated, but admitted that his mother had threatened to kill him, and said sho would be hanged for him yet. Her language towards him was sometimes dreadful, Alice Chapman, a domestic servant, also denial the allegations of the prosecution, but said she was the only person who could manage the defendant. Mr, Rooth said the object of the prosecution was less to punish the defendant than to secure kind treatment for tho boy. The Justices imposed a fine of £25, costs included, or u month's imprisonment, and suggested that Colonel Spalding, with whom the migistrates greatly sympathised, should endeavour to place the boy in tho hands of some friends.