MAINTENANCE ORDER MADE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18317, 6 February 1923, Page 8

MAINTENANCE ORDER MADE

HOWARD NATTRASS AGAIN.

TO SUPPORT HIS WIFE FIRST. . [by telegraph.— press , associatiojJ ' WELLINGTON. Monday! 11 -

Separation, maintenance and guardianship orders wero sought by his wife; against Howard ITittras3, motor* dealer, in the Magistrate's Court to-day.• •;'.., . Counsel for plaintiff : " said the/parties had been living apart. A separation had been arranged in 1919, following upon a case wherein Nattrass was the defendant in an action for seduction. A sun* of £20 a month as maintenance was paid for some time, but this ceased early; in 1921. In April, 1922, fresh deeds were arranged whereby the plaintiff was to receive certain benefits from a patent which the defendant went to America to exploit. Payments were made until November and then ceased. ff n -[■. "ffr'.;. ' ■;■'?,;■;: •• ffs '■.•/■>;

The defendant returned to New .Zealand at the New Year, and the, plaintiff commenced proceedings •to recover maintenance. 1 Last Friday the syndicate with which the defendant was connected paid up the amount of maintenance due under the deed after being threatened; with legal proceedings. Counsel said the defendant had a large number of valuable shares in the patent, yet the rate of maintenance had been reduced from £20 to £10 a month. f - - ■•■'■'/■' , ~

The defendant, in evidence, said he had always been willing to maintain his wife. He explained his financial position, but denied •:. that he • was, keeping the young woman who was concerned in former proceedings! Mr. ; Watson, counsel for the plaintiff, asked where the young woman was. ; .:; The defendant said she was living with his sister. . .... A lively Cross-examination - followed when the magistrate interjected :—'' This man is quite capable of earning his .living,.and it is his duty to look after his wife and child before /he looks after any other lady 'I order that, he pay £3 a week for maintenance of his .wife and £1 for his child." ■ There was a further discussion on the question of security . and a* decision on this point was held over for one month, the defendant -iii.;.the meantime to •'"make an advance payment of £16. ■ »;■■;- i'.v-t '■''•■'■•;;',■'; '■:■ '■■'-■:■->■>■■. '■■""■■ -•' " ■■■, H;<■?"■:'■?',